C.J. Conlan, J.

The plaintiffs commenced an action alleging professional negligence by their real estate lawyer arising from a failed land development transaction.

After being warned by a previous lawyer about the risks of the deal, the plaintiffs proceeded with a closing handled by the defendant solicitor and later suffered financial losses when the purchaser defaulted and the property was lost through power of sale.

The plaintiffs argued the solicitor failed to meet the required standard of care in structuring the transfer and protecting their interest under a joint venture arrangement.

The court held that expert evidence was required to establish the applicable standard of care in the context of a complex real estate transaction.

In the absence of such evidence, and given that the solicitor followed the client’s instructions and cautioned the client about the risks, negligence was not proven.

Following separation, the applicant sought custody, equalization of net family property, and sale of the matrimonial home.

Custody had previously been determined in favour of the respondent prior to trial, and the divorce had already been granted.

The remaining issues concerned distribution of the sale proceeds of the matrimonial home and determination of child support, including arrears and section 7 expenses.

The court ordered equal distribution of the sale proceeds, determined the payor parent’s income based partly on admissions and imputation, and ordered guideline child support with arrears.

The court declined to grant a lump sum support award and rejected a request for security for anticipated post-secondary expenses as speculative.