The appellant husband appealed a trial judgment regarding the division of the parties' home, specifically challenging the trial judge's approach to occupation rent and post-separation credits.
The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's holistic approach, noting that while the respondent wife received 100% credit for occupation rent, the appellant received 100% credit for taxes, insurance, and mortgage principal payments.
The court also declined to admit fresh evidence that could have been introduced at trial.
However, the court varied the judgment to $41,516.20 based on a conceded calculation error.
The appeal was otherwise dismissed with costs to the respondent.
