The respondent husband brought a motion to vary a preservation order under section 12 of the Family Law Act to allow him to obtain a mortgage to close the purchase of a pre-construction condominium.
The applicant wife opposed the motion, citing the husband's failure to disclose significant assets, including foreign bank accounts and real estate, and his history of transferring funds out of the country.
Applying the test for interlocutory injunctions, the court found a serious question to be tried regarding the equalization payment, a risk of irreparable harm due to potential dissipation of assets, and that the balance of convenience favoured the applicant.
The motion to vary the preservation order was dismissed.