Jonathan Korman

The court addresses a high-conflict family law dispute between former spouses regarding the division of proceeds from the sale of their matrimonial home, equalization of net family property, post-separation adjustments, and costs.

The respondent repeatedly failed to comply with disclosure obligations and court orders, resulting in significant delays and additional costs for the applicant.

The court ultimately orders that neither party owes the other an equalization payment, dismisses the applicant's claim for an unequal division of property, but grants her reimbursement for post-separation expenses, writs, and costs, all payable from the respondent's share of the sale proceeds.

This decision addresses a costs endorsement following an uncontested child support trial where the father was found to have acted in bad faith by deliberately misrepresenting his financial position and failing to comply with court orders.

The court awarded the mother $100,000 in costs, inclusive of fees, disbursements, and HST, to be enforced as support by the Director under the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act.

The court emphasized the importance of proportionality and reasonableness in costs awards and recognized the exceptional circumstances due to the father's conduct, which necessitated extensive legal efforts by the mother to uncover his true financial status.

The applicant brought a motion to change seeking retroactive child support over a 21-year period based on the respondent's alleged concealment of income and assets.

Applying the framework in Colucci, the court found a material change in income dating back to the month after the original order, found severe blameworthy conduct and pervasive non-disclosure, and departed from the presumptive retroactivity date.

The court imputed substantially higher income to the payor using a net-worth methodology, held the Guidelines approach remained appropriate despite the child reaching adulthood and the payor's income exceeding $150,000, and declined any further adjustment for section 7 expenses.

Child support arrears were fixed at $899,811 and ordered payable forthwith.

The applicant brought an enforcement motion within a motion to change child support, seeking to strike the respondent's response for failing to comply with multiple financial disclosure orders.

The applicant alleged the self-employed respondent was hiding significant income and assets.

The court found the respondent breached the orders but declined to strike his pleadings, noting it is an exceptional remedy.

Instead, the court ordered the respondent to provide extensive financial disclosure dating back to 2014 and a detailed accounting of his net worth accumulation since 2003.

The respondent was ordered to pay $5,000 in costs for his unreasonable conduct.

The applicant father, Mohammed Firuz, was successful in his motion to increase parenting time.

This endorsement addresses the costs of that motion.

The father sought $6,102, while the mother, Shafiqa Said, requested no costs, citing impecuniosity.

The court found the father's offer to settle was more favorable than the motion's outcome, triggering the costs consequences of Family Law Rule 18(14).

Despite the mother's limited ability to pay, her chronic unreasonable and obstructive behavior regarding parenting time and her failure to make an offer to settle warranted a costs award.

The court ordered the mother to pay the father $3,000 in costs, inclusive of fees and HST, deferring the payment terms until a later date.