The appeal concerned the interpretation of a prior judgment arising in a bankruptcy context and its effect on an equalization entitlement linked to a pension plan.
The appellant argued that the prior order converted the equalization payment into an interest in the pension plan, rendering it not exigible by the respondent.
The court accepted that interpretation and rejected the view that the pension interest served only as security for a fixed money judgment.
The appeal was allowed, the order below was set aside, and the respondent's motion was dismissed, with costs to the appellant limited to disbursements.
