Abou-Fakhreddine v. Fakhreddine, 2010 ABQB 775

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Abou-Fakhreddine v. Fakhreddine, 2010 ABQB 775 Date: 20101206 Docket: FL03 24238 Registry: Edmonton Between: Hiam Abou-Fakhreddine Plaintiff/Respondent - and - Walid Fakhreddine Defendant/Applicant _______________________________________________________ Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Mr. Justice Donald Lee _______________________________________________________ [ 1 ] This is a viva voce hearing with respect to a Restraining Order that was granted on an interim basis in favour of a mother against her 42 year old son.

The son is a realtor who has been professionally employed for approximately 24 years. The Respondent mother has made a number of serious allegations when she made her ex parte application for a Restraining Order. She alleged amongst other things that the police have investigated and charged the son as a result of his threat(

s) to kill her because she would not give him money. She also alleged that the son has is a drug addict, and that she feared for her safety. [ 2 ] A subsequent review of the Edmonton City Police Records provided by the son confirmed that the mother had complained to police about the son on November 4, 2009, however that investigation by police concluded with no further police action being taken as the mother apparently decided not to press charges.

[ 3 ] The son does have a prior criminal record in 1986 for causing a disturbance for which he was fined $75; an assault conviction from October 1996 for which he was fined $300, and in 1999 he was found guilty of driving while impaired and was fined $500. [ 4 ] The police records also indicate around the time of the ex parte Restraining Order that the son was charged with four serious criminal offences related to allegations from his former wife.

The son recently stood trial with respect to these charges for assault; possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose; assault with a weapon; and uttering threats. [ 5 ] Realizing that the trial on the serious matters was pending, and that a decision would be handed down in the Provincial Court in late November 2010, I reserved on the matter of the mother’s permanent Restraining Order application on September 2, 2010, until the outcome of the decision in the son’s criminal trial.

The temporary Restraining Order has remained in place since September 1, 2010. [ 6 ] I now have Defence counsel’s letter with respect to the outcome of the criminal proceedings which confirms that the Applicant was acquitted on all charges, although the trial judge apparently expressed some doubt as to the son’s credibility.

These charges are related to the son’s ongoing dispute with his former wife with whom he is undergoing a child custody battle, and it appears that the Provincial Court Judge took issue with her testimony as well. [ 7 ] I also requested from the son, who has provided the Court with some information relating to his dispute with his former wife in which police and the vulnerable children

section have become involved. However I can see nothing specific in that ongoing matrimonial dispute between the son and his former wife that would directly impact on the mother’s current application for a permanent Restraining Order. Conclusion [ 8 ] I conclude that the real dispute in this matter concerns the Respondent’s husband who is in a care facility as a result of a serious stroke suffered two years ago. The son alleges that his mother is attempting to prevent him from taking efforts to preserve the father’s estate, which he says the mother is attempting to liquidate.

The son alleges that the mother has attempted to alter the father’s Will through undue influence on the sick father. The son apparently has the father’s Power of Attorney to deal with his real estate, which according to the son frustrates the mother’s attempts to sell the real estate, and led her to making the false allegations against him.

The son also alleges that the existence of the Restraining Order is being used against him in the matrimonial proceedings he is currently involved in with his former wife. [ 9 ] Without taking sides in either dispute involving the son, I conclude that the continuation of the Restraining Order in this matter over because of a family property dispute would be inappropriate. The son has established to my satisfaction a reasonable defence to the allegations levelled against him by the mother.

While these parties do not like each other, that is no reason to require Restraining Orders as between them over an argument as to who gets to sell the family real estate, particularly since the Court is not in a position to make any findings on that dispute. [ 10 ] Accordingly the Restraining Order will be vacated in this matter. Heard on the 1 st day of September, 2010. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 6 th day of December, 2010.

Donald Lee J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Hiam Abou-Fakhreddine Appeared on Her Own behalf Walid Fakreddine Appeared on His Own Behalf