The appellant challenged a family law judgment respecting custody, access, equalization, and treatment of a third party's interest in the matrimonial home.
The Court of Appeal applied the deferential standard governing custody determinations and upheld the finding that the children's primary residence should remain with the respondent notwithstanding an earlier Office of the Children’s Lawyer recommendation favouring the appellant.
The court also held that property entitlements must be determined before equalization, and because the respondent's mother was on title and was not made a party, no order could affect her asserted 50% ownership interest.
The deduction of additional amounts advanced by the mother as loans from the respondent's net family property was likewise upheld on the evidentiary record.
The appeal was dismissed with fixed costs to the respondent.
