Lance v. Lance

Lance v. Lance

The court held that equal division of family assets should be applied because the defendant failed to show unfairness under s.65 FRA given his disabling accident occurred after separation and did not result from the marriage; because the defendant disposed of and depleted family assets after court restraint orders the triggering event/valuation date (divorce date 4 December 2006) was used for contested assets; the court attributed specific values, calculated an equalization payment of $15,448.05 (excluding the home proceeds which are to be split equally), ordered $20,000 security for future support, found the defendant guilty of civil contempt for willful breaches of court orders,...

Citation
2009 BCSC 1002
Parties
Plaintiff: Caroline Lidele Lance also known as Caroline Lidel Lance; Defendant: Daniel John Charles Stanley Lance also known as Daniel John Lance
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Divorce and Family Property/support Proceedings With Contempt Motion / Applications for Summary Judgment and Contempt; Reasons for Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff's property division and security applications granted in part; equal division principles applied; defendant found guilty of civil contempt; defendant's claims for reapportionment, spousal support and occupational rent dismissed; passing of sentence suspended.
Legal Topics
Equalization of Family Property, Reapportionment Under S.65 FRA, Valuation Date of Assets, Security for Future Support, Civil Contempt, Occupational Rent, Special Costs
Source Language
English
Family Law Divorce Property Division Spousal Support Child Support Contempt of Court Costs Equalization of Family Property +6 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caroline Lidele Lance also known as Caroline Lidel Lance

Plaintiff

Daniel John Charles Stanley Lance also known as Daniel John Lance

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Divorce and Family Property/support Proceedings With Contempt Motion / Applications for Summary Judgment and Contempt; Reasons for Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to reapportion family assets under s.65 of the Family Relations Act
  2. 2 Proper valuation date for contested assets
  3. 3 Determination and allocation of family assets and debts and equalization payment

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that equal division of family assets should be applied because the defendant failed to show unfairness under s.65 FRA given his disabling accident occurred after separation and did not result from the marriage; because the defendant disposed of and depleted family assets after court restraint orders the triggering event/valuation date (divorce date 4 December 2006) was used for contested assets; the court attributed specific values, calculated an equalization payment of $15,448.05 (excluding the home proceeds which are to be split equally), ordered $20,000 security for future support, found the defendant guilty of civil contempt for willful breaches of court orders,...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's property division and security applications granted in part; equal division principles applied; defendant found guilty of civil contempt; defendant's claims for reapportionment, spousal support and occupational rent dismissed; passing of sentence suspended.

Orders

  • Net proceeds from sale of matrimonial home to be divided equally between the parties
  • Plaintiff to retain: her RRSP, 1993 Mercury Villager minivan, contents of matrimonial home, workshop items in her possession, and 2005 income tax refund