Finally the tort of intentional inflection of mental suffering has no place in family law proceedings: Frame v. Smith, 1987 CanLII 74 (SCC),  2 S.C.R. 99. Counsel for the respondent could provide no authority to the contrary. As a result, para. 5 of the respondent’s counterclaim is struck.
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.