Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal about excluded property and unequal division of a former family residence, upholding equal division.
The court held the Surrey property was not family property, dismissed Joanne’s fraudulent conveyance, unjust enrichment and constructive trust claims, and ordered occupational rent and offset support payments.
The court found the parties cohabited from September 2002, divided family property equally, rejected excluded-property and unequal-division claims, denied spousal support, and granted divorce.
The court ordered the family home net proceeds paid 100% to the respondent, finding equal division would be significantly unfair after years of sole post-separation payments.
The Lutz home was acquired after separation and no legal interest by the husband was proven, so it is not matrimonial; valuation determinations adopt agreed real property values and assigned values for vehicles; the husband failed to prove the CRA and BMO MasterCard debts were matrimonial or reasonably incurred for the family’s benefit, so those debts remain his sole responsibility; the remaining matrimonial assets and divisible debts result in an equalization payment of $169,989.50 payable by the husband to the wife.
Source excerpt
Family property and debt were divided equally in this divorce trial, with sale proceeds from the family home partly set aside for CRA liabilities and limited set-offs ordered.
The court found debts did not justify unequal division under s.13(b) because debts were roughly equivalent and not shown to have been incurred in circumstances making equal division unfair; however, under s.13(e) the date and manner of acquisition justified an unequal division because at least 91% (possibly up to 95%) of matrimonial asset value derived from the respondent's inheritance used for matrimonial purposes; accordingly an unequal division of 75% to the husband and 25% to the wife was ordered, with accompanying payment, possession and sale directions.
Source excerpt
Summary trial in a family property dispute. The court credited the claimant with excluded property, rejected unequal division, and ordered the net family property divided equally.
The court found a marriage-like relationship from November 2011 to July 2017, divided family property and debt, and denied spousal support.
Family law trial over property division and spousal support. The court fixed the Sudbury Avenue valuation date at separation, quantified part of a malpractice settlement as family property, and awarded $5,000 lump sum support.
Explore more
