This case involves civil litigation regarding the enforceability of a domestic contract for dividing family property without independent legal advice or financial disclosure. The key legal question was whether the Miglin framework (from Miglin v. Miglin, 2003) applies to assess the contract's enforceability under Saskatchewan’s Family Property Act (FPA).

Background: The parties, after a three-year marriage, signed a separation agreement stating that each would retain property in their name except for the family home and household goods. The agreement was drafted without financial disclosure or legal counsel. The husband later sought to invalidate the agreement, arguing it was unfair and signed under duress.

Lower Courts' Decisions:

• Trial Court: Ruled the agreement non-binding due to the lack of legal advice, opting for an equal property division under the FPA, resulting in a payment of $90,000 by the wife to the husband.
• Court of Appeal: Reversed the trial court, found the agreement binding, and applied the Miglin framework to uphold it, ordering a reduced payment.

Supreme Court Decision:

• Appeal Allowed: The Supreme Court concluded that the Miglin framework should not directly apply to property division agreements under the FPA. It ruled the agreement fair and binding, reflecting the parties' intentions.
• Outcome: The agreement was enforced, and the wife was ordered to pay the husband $43,382.63 for the division of the family home and household goods.

Successful Party:
Supreme Court ruled in respondent’s favor, upholding the enforceability of the agreement.

Total Monetary Award:
The court ordered Diana Anderson to pay $43,382.63 to James Allan Anderson.