|
A High Court order has been handed down,Nike Air Max 97 Buy, quashing the decision of a Magistrate to refund the spousal maintenance fee for New Amsterdam resident,Cheap Blue Jackets Jerseys, Savitree Persuram.The court noted that a decree absolute to discharge spousal maintenance after divorce was unlawful, ultra vires and without legal authority.Savitree Persuram,Edmonton Oilers Gear, the applicant was awarded a maintenance fee upon the dissolution of marriage to her former husband Peter Singh. The divorce was made absolute on July 6, 2007.The then Magistrate of Providence Magistrate’s Court, Priya Sewnarine- Beharry, made an order that Singh must pay his ex-wife $4000 a month for maintenance and $16,000 a month to the two children until they reach the age of 16 years.However,Cheap Oilers Jerseys, Singh,Nike Air Max 2018 Womens, through his lawyers, approached the court to have the maintenance order discharged.When Singh filed for the discharge order,Nike Vapor Max Plus Triple Black, he argued that even before the legal dissolution of their marriage, his ex-wife had left the matrimonial home and had been living with a new partner and that she continues to do so.Persaud, therefore held that the woman was and is capable of taking care of herself and requested that the maintenance fee $4000 per month to his ex-wife be discharged.He also requested a reimbursement of the money already paid in maintenance to her.Singh’s request was granted by Magistrate Leron Daly. Based on the request, the Magistrate ordered that the maintenance fee be discharged and the monies which were already paid as spousal support under the said order be reimbursed.However, on August 17 last,Calgary Flames Gear, Persuram’s Attorney Mark Conway approached the High Court and successfully obtained an order quashing the decree of Magistrate Daly, that initial order for maintenance spousal was unlawful and that the monies amounting to the sum of $387, 000 be returned.Persuram’s attorney argued that the initial order by the Magistrate is lawfully due, payable and cannot return.The lawyer further claimed that the order by Magistrate Daly to have his client return the monies that were lawfully received is unlawful, capricious, contrary to and devoid of natural justice principles without lawful authority and arbitrary. |
|