Canada Case Law

Janif v. Chander

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The phrase 'the duration of the relationship between the spouses' in s.95(2)(a) of the Family Law Act refers to the period from the beginning of the relationship to the date of separation; the trial judge erred in law by considering post‑separation interactions under s.95(2)(a), and the appeal is allowed and remitted for reconsideration of whether equal division is significantly unfair confined to that statutory period.

Source excerpt

• Division of family property
• Significant unfairness
• Separation date
• Valuation date

Read case analysis

Jobanputra v. The Owners, Strata Plan VR 911

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of a CRT strata decision dismissed. The Court found no procedural unfairness, no reviewable error in statutory interpretation, and no patent unreasonableness.

• Significant unfairness
• Procedural fairness
• Standard of review
• Production of records
• Special levies
• Audits

Read case analysis

E.K. v. M.L.F.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Court upheld a November 2020 spousal support agreement, finding no procedural unfairness or significant unfairness, and ordered equal sharing of a s. 211 report cost.

• Section 164 family law act
• Spousal support advisory guidelines (ssag)
• Misrepresentation
• Failure to disclose
• Significant unfairness
• Section 211 psychological report

Read case analysis

Hui v. The Owners, Strata Plan BCS3702

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held it had concurrent jurisdiction over a strata unfairness claim, refused to refer the matter to the CRT, and declined to convert the action to a petition.

• Significant unfairness
• Jurisdictional transfer to crt
• Attornment
• Conversion to petition
• Document discovery
• Proportionality

Read case analysis

Schrader v. Schrader

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Appeal partly allowed: retroactive spousal support was reduced to reflect the appellant’s actual 2022 income. The agreement-setting-aside ruling and the fresh evidence dismissal were upheld.

• Separation agreement
• Significant unfairness
• Retroactive spousal support
• Fresh evidence application
• Calculation correction
• Family-law

Read case analysis

Trinden Enterprises Ltd. v. Civil Resolution Tribunal and The Owners

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

On judicial review, the Supreme Court of British Columbia upheld a CRT decision about disputed strata parking stalls and dismissed Trinden Enterprises Ltd.'s petition.

• Limited common property
• Significant unfairness
• Promissory estoppel
• Reasonable expectations
• Judicial review - patent unreasonableness
• Document production

Read case analysis

Nicol v. Lau

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court set aside a cohabitation agreement in relation to the Naramata property project, awarded the claimant $105,000, dismissed spousal support, and declined to impose a fine.

• Cohabitation agreement
• Procedural fairness
• Significant unfairness
• Setting aside agreement
• Property division
• Spousal support

Read case analysis

F.C.A.S. v. C.E.S.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Oral ruling in a family law trial on whether a marriage agreement may be set aside under s. 93(5) of the Family Law Act and the scope of witness questioning.

• Marriage agreement
• Section 93(5) family law act
• Significant unfairness
• Witness examination limits
• Income disclosure
• Family-law

Read case analysis

Richardson v. The Owners, Strata Plan VR 2083

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found a triable issue about the validity of a strata AGM/SGM vote and ordered production of Wynford Group emails, with privilege review and cross-examination adjourned.

• Enforcement of tribunal order
• Document production
• Proxy voting and meeting procedure
• Special general meeting
• Significant unfairness
• Functus officio

Read case analysis

Singh v. Chandi

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Family property and debt were divided under the FLA, with the family home valued at separation because equal division of post-separation growth would be significantly unfair.

• Family property
• Family debt
• Equalization
• Valuation date
• Significant unfairness
• Financial disclosure

Read case analysis