C. Pineiro

This costs endorsement followed cross-motions where the respondent successfully obtained summary judgment dismissing the applicant's claim to set aside a final order, while the applicant was permitted to proceed with a motion to change child support.

The court found the respondent to be more successful on the dominant issue of upholding the final order.

Considering the respondent's formal offer to settle, which was more advantageous than the motion's outcome, and the reasonableness of the parties' conduct, the court awarded the respondent costs.

The court also considered the financial circumstances of both parties, noting the applicant's responsibility for unsuccessfully attempting to set aside a consented final order.

Costs were fixed at $9,000, inclusive of disbursements and HST, payable monthly.

In a family law motion, the respondent sought a preservation order over the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home pending determination of equalization.

The moving party argued that the funds should remain secured because the other spouse would likely owe a significant equalization payment and the property represented the primary realizable asset.

The court found a strong prima facie case that an equalization payment would be owed and that the inheritance used toward the matrimonial home likely lost its excluded character.

However, the court permitted the purchase of a replacement property provided the equity from the matrimonial home effectively transferred to the new property and remained available as security.

A charge was ordered against the new property under the Family Law Act to preserve the responding party’s equalization claim.