Joanne King

The applicant mother brought a motion to change a 2014 final consent order regarding child support and section 7 expenses.

She sought to set aside the fixed child support provisions, arguing she did not understand the settlement due to cognitive distress and financial pressure.

The court dismissed her claims, finding her evidence not credible and upholding the settlement agreement.

The court also imputed an annual income of $90,000 to the applicant for 2017 and 2018 due to intentional under-employment, and ordered her to pay her 50 percent share of section 7 expenses totaling $8,060.82.

The appellant and her husband sold their farming business to their son and daughter-in-law.

The appellant sought rectification of the memorandum of agreement and the vendor take-back mortgage, arguing that the purchase price for the real property was incorrectly recorded due to a drafting error.

The trial judge dismissed the claim, holding that the appellant failed to meet the standard of 'convincing proof' and that the parties lacked a common intention.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding that the ordinary civil standard of proof applies to rectification claims and that the trial judge erred by relying on the respondent's subjective belief rather than an objective assessment of the parties' common intention based on the totality of the evidence.