David Robins

The appellant appealed an order granting summary judgment that dismissed his claim against Linamar for intentional interference with economic relations.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the record contained evidence of actions and documents involving Linamar such that it could not be said there was no genuine issue for trial.

The summary judgment was set aside, and costs of the appeal were fixed at $10,000.

The deceased, knowing he was terminally ill, secretly transferred his business assets and the matrimonial home to his children to defeat his wife's equalization claim under the Family Law Act.

After his death, the wife elected to take an equalization payment rather than her legacy under the will and sought to set aside the transfers under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's decision setting aside the transfers, finding that the wife qualified as a 'creditor or other' under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act because she had an imminent right to apply for equalization at the time of the transfers.

The Court confirmed that the Family Law Act does not oust the operation of the Fraudulent Conveyances Act.