Brent Kenneth Harasym

On a family law appeal, the appellant challenged an order requiring repayment of spousal support overpayments for two years over a 24-month period, arguing the motion judge misinterpreted the separation agreement and made a palpable and overriding error.

The court held the agreement set out a mechanism for calculating overpayments but not for repayment, and that the parties' historical practice of adjusting one year of overpayment over the following year did not mandate a different result when three years of overpayments had accumulated.

Relying on the deferential appellate standard of review and the enforcement provisions of the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act, 1996, the court found the Ontario Court of Justice had jurisdiction and discretion to craft a reasonable repayment order.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant corporation appealed a decision of the Ministry of Revenue refusing to cancel deferred land transfer tax under s. 3(11) of the Land Transfer Tax Act.

The Ministry argued that registration of a development agreement constituted a conveyance or instrument evidencing the disposition of a beneficial interest in land, thereby triggering the tax.

The court held that the registered development agreement merely referenced the appellant as owner and did not identify the specific transfer of beneficial interest from the affiliated corporation.

As a result, it did not constitute an instrument evidencing the disposition under the statute.

The appeal was allowed and the Minister was directed to vacate the disallowance and return the funds.