Mari-Anne Saunders

The appellant husband appealed a divorce judgment regarding pension valuation, investment ownership, spousal support, retroactive spousal support, matrimonial home valuation, and the terms of the equalization payment.

The Court of Appeal dismissed most grounds of appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge's determinations of spousal support, pension valuation, or property issues.

However, the Court allowed the appeal in part regarding retroactive spousal support, as the trial judge failed to advert to the governing considerations or explain the calculation, remitting this issue to the trial judge.

The Court also remitted the terms of the equalization payment and non-depletion order if the parties could not agree.

The appellant husband appealed a divorce judgment regarding pension valuation, investment ownership, spousal support, retroactive spousal support, matrimonial home valuation, and the terms of an equalization payment.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings on pension valuation, investments, ongoing spousal support of $1700 per month, and the matrimonial home valuation.

However, the Court found the trial judge failed to explain the basis for awarding $30,000 in retroactive spousal support and remitted that issue to the trial judge.

The Court also set aside the terms regarding the equalization payment and non-depletion order, remitting them to the trial judge if the parties cannot agree.