The appellant appealed an order enforcing minutes of settlement that vested a property in the respondent after the appellant defaulted on lump sum support payments.
The appellant argued for an extension of time to sell the property, challenged the respondent's standing to seek a vesting order, and contested the motion judge's reference to the continuing record.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the appellant's proposed sale agreement was too conditional and uncertain, and rejected the standing argument as it was raised for the first time on appeal.
The respondent's cross-appeal was also dismissed as it dealt with matters not before the motion judge.