The applicant sought orders declaring a Toronto property to be a matrimonial home, authorizing a mortgage without the titled spouse’s consent under s. 23 of the Family Law Act, and staying a lender’s power of sale proceedings.
The respondent opposed the application and brought a cross‑application seeking cancellation of a matrimonial home designation and vacant possession.
The court held that the dispute was fundamentally a family law matter that should have been commenced under the Family Law Rules with full financial disclosure rather than under the Rules of Civil Procedure.
Given deficient evidence, contested marital status, and lack of financial disclosure, the court declined to grant interlocutory relief to either party.
Both applications were dismissed without prejudice and administratively transferred to the Family Law Court, allowing the parties to recommence proceedings properly.
