2012 QCCA 512, 2012 QCCA 512

Droit de la famille — 12598 2012 QCCA 512 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-022490-122 (500-12-307889-117) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: March 16, 2012 THE HONOURABLE PIERRE J. DALPHOND, J.A. PETITIONER ATTORNEYS S. S. Mtre Gerald Stotland Mtre Julie Brisson LAVERY DE BILLY Mtre Julius Grey GREY CASGRAIN RESPONDENT ATTORNEYS L. SH. Mtr e Linda Schachter Mtre Tamar Ajamian DEVINE SCHACHTER POLAK Mtre Christine A. Carron NORTON ROSE CANADA

APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR THE SUSPENSION OF THE PROVISIONAL EXECUTION OF A SAFEGUARD ORDER Clerk: Annick Nguyen Court Room: RC.18 HEARING 14:19 Commencement of the hearing. 14:20 Submission by Mtre Grey. 14:31 Submission by Mtre Stotland. 15:08 Submission by Mtre Schachter. 15:23 Submission by Mtre Carron. 15:35 Reply by Mtre Stotland. 15:37 Comments by Mtre Schachter. 15:38 BY THE JUDGE. Judgment – See page 3. 15:42 Exchange between the judge and counsels. 15:48 Precision by the judge. 15:50 Conclusion of the hearing.

Annick Nguyen Clerk JUDGMENT [ 1 ] I am seized with a motion to suspend provisional execution of a series of interim orders made by Justice Borenstein on March 8, 2012. [ 2 ] The judgment is short but the documentation is thick. [ 3 ] We are at the preliminary stages of what could be a long divorce trial. [ 4 ] Pursuant to s. 21 of the Divorce Act , there is an appeal as of right of any order, interim, provisional or final, made by the Superior Court under said act. [ 5 ] I am of the view that the orders contested can be considered made pursuant to the Divorce Act . An inscription in appeal has been filed.

[ 6 ] However a suspension of the orders is required since the judge has ordered provisional execution notwithstanding appeal. [ 7 ] After having listened to the parties, I am of the view that I should suspend provisional execution of the following paragraphs of the judgment: - [33] because some of the information on the USB key may be confidential and personal.

The procedure contemplated at paragraph [18] of the judgment will compromise this confidentiality at least in part; - [34], [35], [36] and [38], for the reason that I am unclear on how far these orders go, so possibly beyond the undertakings made; - [32] since I consider that a provision for costs should be decided only once a panel of this Court has ruled on paragraphs 33, 34, 35, 36 and 38. [ 8 ] THEREFORE, THE UNDERSIGNED: [ 9 ] GRANTS in part the motion to suspend provisional execution; [ 10 ] ORDERS the appellant, after having served a copy upon the respondent, to file in the office of the Court, no later than May 18, 2012 , four copies of a written argument not exceeding 20 pages , of the documents that would normally have made up schedules I, II and III of his factum and of his authorities; [ 11 ] ORDERS the respondent, after having served a copy upon the appellant, to file in the office of the Court, no later than July 20, 2012 , for copies of a written argument not exceeding 25 pages , of her supplementary documents, and of her authorities; [ 12 ] ORDERS the parties to present their written arguments on 21.5 cm X 28 cm (8 ½ X 11 in.) paper, with line spacing of at least 1.5 lines (except in the case of quotations, which must be single-spaced and indented), and the computer-prepared text shall be in 12-point type, with no more than 12 characters per 2.5 cm; [ 13 ] ORDERS that the documents filed by the parties carry a continuous pagination or tabs, a front cover and a general table of contents; [ 14 ] DEFERS the file to the Master of the rolls to determine the date of a 2 hours hearing; [ 15 ] THE WHOLE , with costs to follow.

PIERRE J. DALPHOND, J.A.