The respondent, Paul Wynn, brought a motion to bifurcate two key issues in a complex family law proceeding: the enforceability of a marriage contract and the determination of Paul's beneficial interest in significant family properties and businesses, including bare trust claims.
The added respondents supported the bifurcation of the property issue.
The applicant, Leslie Wynn, opposed the motion, seeking a single trial for all issues.
The court granted the motion, ordering the severance of issues into three separate trials or segments.
The court found that bifurcation was convenient and in the interests of justice due to the case's complexity, the potential for significant cost and time savings by avoiding extensive valuations, and the increased prospects for early settlement, concluding that there would be no undue prejudice to the applicant.
