Justin Clark

Following motions for an interim parenting order and a Form 14B motion for fresh evidence, the successful respondent mother sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis.

The applicant father argued no costs should be awarded or they should be reserved to the trial judge.

The court rejected the father's arguments, finding his settlement offers unreasonable and his Form 14B motion materials misleading.

The court awarded the respondent mother costs fixed at $23,000 inclusive of taxes and disbursements.

The applicant mother brought a motion for $30,000 in interim disbursements under Rule 24(12) of the Family Law Rules to fund a critique of the respondent father's income valuation and further litigation steps regarding child support.

The court applied the modified Okanagan test for family law cases.

While finding the applicant impecunious and that an award would level the playing field, the court dismissed the motion without prejudice because the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case that the respondent's income was higher than disclosed, and failed to provide evidence detailing how the requested funds would be utilized.

The applicant wife and respondent husband separated after a 25-year relationship.

The wife sought spousal support and equalization of net family property.

The court found that the matrimonial home, which had been transferred solely to the wife's name to protect it from the husband's creditors, was held 50 percent in trust for the husband under the presumption of a resulting trust.

The court declined to order an unequal division of net family property, finding that the husband's morally reprehensible conduct did not meet the exceptionally high threshold of unconscionability under s. 5(6) of the Family Law Act.

The wife was ordered to pay an equalization payment of $107,540.28.

The court found the wife entitled to spousal support, imputing the husband's income at $95,000.

Due to the high level of acrimony between the parties, the court ordered the husband to pay a lump sum spousal support amount of $96,064 to effect a clean break.

The applicant wife sought spousal support and equalization of net family property following a 25-year relationship.

The court found that the matrimonial home, which had been transferred solely to the wife's name to shield it from the husband's creditors, was held in a resulting trust with each party owning a 50 percent interest.

The court declined to order an unequal division of net family property despite the husband's morally reprehensible conduct, finding it did not meet the high threshold of unconscionability.

The wife was ordered to pay an equalization payment of $107,540.28.

The court also found the wife entitled to compensatory spousal support, imputed the husband's income at $95,000, and ordered a lump sum spousal support payment of $96,064 to effect a clean break due to high acrimony.