The court rectified a 2014 family order using 2014 property values, awarded an additional lump sum spousal support amount, and adjourned support and child support claims.
The waiver was valid because the signer had implied and ostensible authority and the Tax Court judge preferred the auditor's evidence over the signer's; non est factum did not apply because the signer was a sophisticated businessman who was careless in not reading the document; the cost-of-capital approach correctly measures shareholder benefits where corporate capital is tied up in non-rental properties; one appellant (A-537-06) is entitled to credit for certain corporate expenses paid and the matter is remitted to the Minister for reassessment accordingly.