The applicant wife sought to set aside a 2008 separation agreement, alleging the respondent husband deliberately misrepresented the value of his business interests at the date of marriage to eliminate his equalization payment obligation.
The court found the husband, an astute investor, intentionally failed to disclose that the market value of his holding company's investments was significantly lower than the book value he presented.
The separation agreement was set aside under s. 56(4) of the Family Law Act.
The court determined the parties' net family properties, finding the husband's date of marriage business value was nil, and ordered him to pay an equalization payment of $1,055,758.
The court also awarded retroactive child support of $345,000 and compensatory spousal support of $475,000, imputing significant corporate pre-tax income to the husband.
