This decision addresses two motions within a partition and sale application concerning the distribution of property sale proceeds.
Annette Curtis sought immediate one-third distribution to each party, while Lenn Curtis sought to preserve the funds in trust or court pending an oppression application.
The court found jurisdiction under Rule 66.03.
Lenn Curtis's request was akin to a Mareva injunction, but the court found the test not fully met due to delay and lack of evidence of asset dissipation risk.
However, the court exercised its discretion under the Partition Act, finding that the property issues were intertwined with the ongoing oppression application and that immediate distribution would be oppressive and cause hardship.
Consequently, Annette Curtis's motion for distribution was dismissed, and the funds were ordered to remain in trust or be paid into court, with the application adjourned to be heard with the oppression application.
