D. Spiller

The moving party defendants brought a motion to set aside a noting in default and a default judgment obtained by the plaintiff in an action concerning the purchase of a vacant building lot.

The defendants had attempted to file a notice of intent to defend and a statement of defence within the required timelines, but errors by a law clerk and the plaintiff's swift action to note them in default prevented the filings.

The court applied the tests for setting aside a noting in default and a default judgment, finding that the defendants had a plausible excuse, moved promptly, and presented an arguable defence on the merits.

The motion was granted, and the noting in default, default judgment, and writ of seizure were set aside.

The parties separated after a seven-year marriage.

The core issues at trial involved claims for retroactive child and spousal support, equalization of net family property, and a claim for unequal division under s. 5(6) of the Family Law Act.

A significant portion of the trial focused on determining the fair market value of the applicant's 33.3% interest in a logistics company.

The court preferred the valuation evidence of the respondent's expert, with some modifications, valuing the interest at $358,500.00.

The court dismissed the applicant's claim that equalization would be unconscionable due to a post-separation decline in the company's value.

The court ordered the respondent to pay retroactive child support and reimburse the applicant for an overpayment of spousal support.

Ultimately, the applicant was ordered to pay an equalization payment of $183,589.09 to the respondent.