The parties divorced after 26 years of marriage.
The appellant wife had acquired a restaurant and other assets almost exclusively through her own efforts, while the respondent husband, an alcoholic, contributed virtually nothing to child care, household management, or financial provision.
The trial judge ordered an unequal division of marital property, awarding the husband $6,000.
The Court of Appeal set aside this order, holding that equal division was required.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and restored the trial judge's order, finding that the husband's negligible contribution justified departing from the general principle of equal division under section 7(f) of the Marital Property Act.
