Fayrouse Hassaan

This family law motion concerned the final disbursement of funds from the sale of the matrimonial home.

The respondent husband sought reimbursement of $22,293.39 from the applicant wife's share for 50% of carrying costs he paid post-separation.

The court found that the settlement agreement and consent order, which included a spousal support release for the respondent, implicitly resolved the carrying cost claim.

The respondent's claim for reimbursement was dismissed, and the funds were ordered to be disbursed according to the agreed-upon deductions and entitlements, with the applicant receiving the larger share.

The applicant, a 50% shareholder and operator of a pharmacy, sought an interlocutory injunction in the context of an oppression remedy application against the respondent shareholders.

The respondents had suspended the applicant's employment and changed bank signing authorities after discovering alleged self-dealing.

The court dismissed the applicant's request for broad injunctive relief that would have excluded the respondents from the business, finding it went far beyond maintaining the status quo.

The court ordered limited interim measures, including dual-signature requirements for cheques, and directed the parties to agree on a valuator for a potential buyout.

The applicant, an equitable receiver for a creditor, sought an order for the judicial sale of a matrimonial home under the Partition Act to satisfy outstanding costs orders against one of the co-owners.

The respondents opposed, arguing the receiver lacked standing and that a sale would be oppressive to the innocent co-owner.

The court held that an equitable receiver, when authorized, has standing to bring such an application, distinguishing it from an execution creditor.

The court exercised its discretion to order the sale, finding that the inconvenience to the co-owner was insufficient to outweigh the creditor's right to collect, especially given the substantial equity in the property.