Nasar Iqbal

The appellant challenged property and costs aspects of a family law judgment after an 11-day trial.

The court found only a minor arithmetic error in deducting valuation-date debt, increasing the equalization payment by $4,250.

All remaining grounds, including tracing, exclusions, RESP treatment, post-separation adjustments, and costs, were rejected.

This decision resolves a range of family law issues following the separation of Mei Yee Lau and Wing Hong Tao, including parenting time, child support, property division, and the treatment of gifts and loans from family members.

The court determined the best interests of the children required a parenting schedule closely aligned with the mother's proposal, found the date of separation to be December 24, 2019, and addressed the tracing and exclusion of gifted property under the Family Law Act.

The court also considered the treatment of RESPs, imputed income to the mother for child support purposes, and made orders for equalization and post-separation adjustments.

The respondent was found in contempt for deliberately breaching an interim preservation and non-dissipation order by obtaining mortgages on a property, transferring proceeds to her mother, and transferring another property to her sister.

Despite being given four months to undertake meaningful efforts to purge the contempt, she failed to do so.

The court considered aggravating factors, such as the deliberate and flagrant nature of the breaches and financial benefit, and mitigating factors, including her admission and apology.

The court ordered the respondent to pay $180,000 into court by a specific date, failing which a 15-day custodial sentence would be imposed.

The court also ordered disclosure related to an undisclosed property.

This trial addressed parenting, child support, and spousal support.

The father sought sole decision-making and primary residence, while the mother sought shared parenting and support.

The court found the father more credible and granted him sole decision-making and primary residence, establishing a detailed parenting schedule for the mother.

Child support was ordered from the mother to the father, with arrears offset.

The mother was found to have a modest entitlement to spousal support, which was also fully offset by child support arrears.

The decision emphasized the child's best interests, parental cooperation, and the father's stable care.

The applicant sought costs of $7,500 following three motions concerning parenting time, school registration, and the sale of the matrimonial home.

The respondent requested no order for costs.

The court found divided success but determined the applicant was the more successful party on the core issues.

Considering the parties' behaviour, the importance of the issues, and the time spent, the court ordered the respondent to pay $6,000 in costs to the applicant, payable from his share of the net proceeds of the sale of the matrimonial home.