Canada Case Law

Byrne v. Carlow-Byrne

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

22 Empire Loop is matrimonial property and the statutory presumption of equal division applies. The respondent's prior ownership, sole title, sole payment of mortgage/taxes/insurance, and prior division in an earlier divorce did not constitute the convincing evidence required under s.13 to justify an unequal division. Applicant's documented financial and non-financial contributions supported an equal split. Accordingly net sale proceeds are to be divided equally; no retroactive child support awarded; prospective child support set on current income of $95,533 at $814/month commencing March 1,…

Source excerpt

• Unequal division under s.13
• Matrimonial home
• Retroactive and prospective child support
• Administrative recalculation of support
• Personal property claim

Read case analysis

Epshtein v. Shvartzman

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal about a pre-marital domestic agreement, upholding findings that the agreement was unclear and unenforceable.

• Domestic agreement
• Enforceability
• Section 56(4)
• Equalization
• Matrimonial home
• Credibility findings

Read case analysis

Lau v. Tao

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court of Appeal corrected a $4,250 arithmetic error in equalization, but otherwise dismissed the appeal on tracing, RESP treatment, matrimonial home, and costs issues.

• Gifts and tracing
• Net family property
• Equalization payment
• Matrimonial home
• Registered education savings plan (resp) treatment
• Post-separation adjustments

Read case analysis

Robson v. Pellerin

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Ontario Court of Appeal partly allowed a family law appeal, correcting a post-separation credit calculation, while upholding the trial judge on equalization, spousal support, and most other issues.

• Equalization
• Post-separation adjustments
• Valuation date
• Matrimonial home
• Inheritance
• Loans vs gifts

Read case analysis

Duffy v. Duffy

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Subject Order was interlocutory because it merely enforced and implemented the prior final Consent Order that had already determined the parties' substantive rights in the matrimonial home; accordingly the appeal to the Court of Appeal was not competent and is quashed, and the court declines to transfer the appeal to the Divisional Court under s.110 due to prejudice and delay.

Source excerpt

• Right of first refusal
• Matrimonial home
• Final vs interlocutory order
• Jurisdiction of appeal courts
• Costs

Read case analysis

C.M.P. v. D.J.P.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a $100,000 interim distribution under s. 89 of the Family Law Act, holding that an unchallenged marriage agreement did not oust jurisdiction.

• Interim distribution
• Marriage agreement
• Family law act s.89
• Jurisdiction
• Matrimonial home
• Spousal support

Read case analysis

O’Brien v. Brunt

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applying the CRO and the July 2023 decision, the court held the Scotiabank line of credit shared equally based on timely production of documentation, treated home operating costs as the responsibility of the party with exclusive possession, disallowed or limited numerous claims for lack of particulars or necessity, allocated interest on assigned debts 50/50 where appropriate, accepted the Kelley Blue Book exhibit as sole evidence of F150 value and awarded half that value to the respondent, and computed net adjustments resulting in a net payment obligation by Sheila O’Brien to Nathan Brunt of…

Source excerpt

• Matrimonial home
• Equalization
• Corollary relief order
• Exclusive possession
• Allocation of debts and expenses
• Valuation of assets

Read case analysis

Karatzoglou v. Commisso

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Motion judge correctly concluded there was no evidence of any express, resulting or constructive trust in respect of either property and that the appellant lacked standing to advance trust claims on behalf of a former spouse for equalization purposes; summary judgment was therefore appropriate and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Constructive trust
• Resulting trust
• Standing to sue
• Summary judgment
• Equalization of net family property
• Matrimonial home

Read case analysis

Non Chhom v. Green

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge acted within judicial discretion and applicable law: the occupation rent order was reasonable and supported by Griffiths factors; the trial judge provided sufficient assistance to the self-represented appellant and was not obliged to correct procedural defaults; and the Alberta pension’s capitalized value crystallized pre-marriage and did not increase for equalization.

Source excerpt

• Spousal support
• Equalization
• Matrimonial home
• Occupation rent
• Self-represented litigant assistance
• Pension valuation

Read case analysis

Huang v. Balchen

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court divided property in a family law dispute, found the Chilliwack down payment excluded, awarded the claimant the Toronto property’s increase, and dismissed spousal support.

• Excluded property (family law act s.85)
• Significant unfairness and reapportionment (s.95)
• Matrimonial home
• Division of increase in value
• Financial disclosure
• Family-law

Read case analysis