Following separation of a second marriage with no children, the court determined outstanding family law issues including valuation of farm equipment, equalization of net family property, and continuation of spousal support.
The applicant alleged that partial minutes of settlement resolving certain property issues had been signed under a forged signature, but the court rejected the allegation on a balance of probabilities and upheld the validity of the settlement.
Conflicting appraisal evidence regarding farm equipment values was presented, and the court preferred the respondent’s expert evidence due to its credibility and methodological reliability.
The court calculated equalization payable to the applicant based largely on the respondent’s valuations and ordered payment within 30 days.
Due to the applicant’s litigation conduct and unsupported allegations of fraud, the court awarded partial indemnity costs to the respondent and deducted those costs from the equalization payment.
