The respondent father moved for partition and sale of a jointly owned home and occupation rent.
The applicant mother opposed, claiming unjust enrichment due to her payment of carrying costs and renovations, arguing the sale should await trial for a proprietary remedy.
The court ordered the sale of the home, finding no malicious, vexatious, or oppressive conduct by the father.
It dismissed the mother's unjust enrichment claim regarding the increased value of the home, stating that unilateral improvements do not create an obligation for the other party to forgo their share of appreciation.
The court awarded the father occupation rent from October 2020 (when he initiated legal steps for sale) and ordered the father to contribute to post-separation carrying costs and agreed renovation expenses.
