Citation: McLean v. Yaremko, 2014 MBCA 56 Date: 20140604 Docket: AF 13-30-08083 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Coram: Madam Justice Barbara M. Hamilton Madam Justice Diana M. Cameron Mr. Justice William J. Burnett BETWEEN : CAROLINE LOUISE DENBY McLEAN ) C. L. D. McLean ) on her own behalf (Petitioner) Appellant ) ) D. E.

Johnston - and - ) for the Respondent ) CLARENCE ROSS YAREMKO ) Appeal heard and ) Decision pronounced: (Respondent) Respondent ) June 4, 2014 HAMILTON J.A. (for the Court): [ 1 ] After a one-day trial with witnesses called by both parties, the judge wrote reasons explaining why the appellant had not met the onus on her to establish that she and the respondent were in a common-law relationship under The Family Property Act , C.C.S.M., c. F25. [ 2 ] The judge set out the applicable law and reviewed the evidence called by both the appellant and the respondent.

He found that the appellant’s evidence was unreliable and he accepted the evidence of the respondent, noting that it was corroborated in many respects by the six witnesses that he called to testify. Those findings are entitled to deference. [ 3 ] The appellant argues that she did not receive a fair hearing because she did not have a lawyer and did not understand the process.

The record, in our view, discloses that the hearing, while difficult for her, was a fair one. [ 4 ] The appellant asserts that the judge misunderstood or ignored the evidence and therefore erred when he concluded that the parties were not in a common-law relationship. However, we must conclude that the appellant has not established that the judge made any errors of fact or law in reaching the conclusion that he did. [ 5 ] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs in favour of the respondent in the amount of $1,000 inclusive of disbursements. J.A. J.A. J.A.