Domestic-Contracts-Case-Comment-on-Hartshorne-vdot-Hartshorne

Davis & CompanyDomestic Contracts:Case Comment onHartshorne v. Hartshorne and S.M.J. v. R.H.C.W.JULY, 2004Grace Choi2800 Park Place666 Burrard StreetVancouver, BCCanada V6C 2Z7Tel: 604.687.9444Fax: 604.687.1612www.davis.ca© Davis & Company, 2004. This paper is the property of Davis & Company. No reproduction of any part of this paper is permitted without the prior permission of the authors.This paper is intended to provide general comments on developments in the law. It is not intended to be a comprehensive review nor is it intended to provide legal advice.Readers should not act on information in the paper without seeking specific advice on the particular matter. Our firm would be pleased to provide additional details or discusshow this information is relevant to a specific situation.© 2004 Davis & Company 1VANCOUVER TORONTO MONTRÉAL CALGARY EDMONTON WHITEHORSE YELLOWKNIFE TOKYODavis & CompanyDomestic Contracts: Case Comment onHartshorne v. Hartshorne and S.M.J. v. R.H.C.W.by Grace ChoiJuly, 2004If you have signed a prenuptial agreement, or are considering signing one, a recent decision by theSupreme Court of Canada may impact how that contract will stand up to a future court challenge. InHartshorne v. Hartshorne, the Court upheld a marriage contract, or “prenup”, between the Hartshornes,despite Mrs. Hartshorne’s claim that the agreement should be set aside due to unfairness. In BC, as inmost other ...