What is the test for a pleading of conspiracy in a family law case?

I rely on the case of Waters v. Michie[65] in which the court considered the leading cases of Canada Cement and Frame v. Smith. In Waters, the trial judge struck the appellant’s plea of conspiracy against her former husband and his current wife in a family law action. The appellant plead that the husband transferred the properties by of conspiracy with his new wife in order to deprive the former wife of child support.

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge did not err in striking the claim based on the principles in Frame v. Smith. The court began by citing the principles in Canada Cement with respect to the scope of the tort of conspiracy. The court also discussed problems with the tort of conspiracy including the fact that the tort of conspiracy “may have lost much of its usefulness in our commercial world, and survives in our law as an anomaly.”[66]