Competing motions arose regarding funding the care of an incapable elderly woman under the Substitute Decisions Act.
One child sought to increase a line of credit secured against the incapable person’s Toronto condominium to fund ongoing care, while other siblings sought an order to sell a Florida condominium allegedly jointly owned with one sibling.
The court held that the urgent need to maintain care justified extending the line of credit, while disputes concerning ownership, expenses, occupation rent, and tax consequences relating to the Florida property required further evidentiary determination.
A bifurcated hearing was ordered to resolve those issues before determining whether the Florida property should be sold.