An appeal concerning the equalization of net family property following a marriage breakdown, specifically the interpretation and application of a domestic contract regarding a $45,000 deposit on a matrimonial home.
The appellant argued the trial judge double-counted this amount, giving the respondent an unfair advantage.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred by allowing the $45,000 to be both an exclusion under the domestic contract and a marriage-date deduction under the Family Law Act.
The appeal was allowed in part, correcting the arithmetic error and reducing the equalization payment owed by the appellant.
