Carolyn R. Leach

The respondent husband brought a motion for interim spousal support following the breakdown of a seven-year cohabitation and four-year marriage.

The applicant wife, a physician who had recently completed a medical fellowship and commenced a substantially higher-paying position, opposed the motion, disputing the respondent's compensatory and non-compensatory claims and arguing that no income increase should be shared.

The court found a prima facie entitlement to spousal support on both compensatory and non-compensatory grounds, but declined to base quantum on the applicant's post-separation income increase due to the conflicting evidence regarding the respondent's contributions.

The court fixed the applicant's income at $85,490 for support purposes based on a five-year average, declined to impute income to the respondent, and ordered interim spousal support at the high end of the SSAG range at $2,254 per month.

The respondent wife brought a motion for interim disbursements under r. 24(25) of the Family Law Rules to fund legal representation for a long motion and trial in a complex family law proceeding involving division of net family property and spousal support.

The parties had a decades-long marriage with business interests spanning Canada and Taiwan, and the case was complicated by the misappropriation of approximately $5.5 million in Taiwan land sale proceeds by an adult child.

The court granted $25,000 for the long motion, finding the respondent had demonstrated the disbursements were necessary and reasonable, that she was unable to fund the fees herself, and that her claims were meritorious.

The request for $220,000 for trial fees was dismissed without prejudice as the trial scope depended on the outcome of the long motion.

The applicant mother brought a motion to enforce a consent order requiring the respondent father to comply with a court-ordered therapeutic reunification process and to provide photographs and weekly updates about the children.

Over 5.5 years of litigation, multiple clinicians found the father obstructed the children's relationship with the mother, while psychological assessments confirmed the mother posed no risk to the children.

The court found multiple breaches of the consent order, declined to exercise its discretion in favour of the non-complying father given his pattern of chronic non-compliance, and imposed monetary penalties under Rule 1(8)(a.1) of the Family Law Rules to incentivize future compliance with the therapeutic process.

The respondent husband brought a motion for partition and sale of the jointly held matrimonial home under the Partition Act.

The applicant wife opposed the sale, asserting outstanding family law claims including spousal support, equalization, and tort damages for alleged intimate partner violence.

The court found that the wife had legitimate family law claims that would be unfairly prejudiced by a sale and disbursement of proceeds, that the children would experience negative impacts beyond the inevitable disruptions of separation, and that the wife qualified as a vulnerable spouse.

As the sale proceeds would need to remain in trust pending resolution of the financial claims, there was no practical advantage to forcing the sale.

Motion dismissed.

The applicant husband brought a motion for interim spousal support following a 27-year marriage, claiming entitlement on both compensatory and non-compensatory grounds.

The court found that the husband failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to spousal support, given extensive conflicting evidence regarding the roles each party played during the marriage, the husband's past and current income, and whether he experienced any economic hardship or decline in standard of living since separation.

The motion was dismissed, as the conflicted record could not support a finding of entitlement at the interim stage; the court noted that entitlement and quantum would need to be resolved at trial.

A secondary motion to strike the respondent's pleadings for disclosure non-compliance was resolved, with outstanding disclosure items to be provided within 14 days.