Court of Appeal for Ontario

Wilson v. Wilson

Date: 2002-04-26

Counsel: Michael M. Miller, for Appellant Carl Garland, for Respondent/Respondent in Appeal

Docket: CA C37217

Carthy J.A.:

[1] We can see no basis for supporting the order under appeal. The motion judge overlooked the agreed statement of facts stating clearly that there was no basis for an equalization payment. At the date of separation the debts of both parties exceeded the assets, including the value of the pension. The debts were later cleared through bankruptcy having the pension outstanding but still a zero equalization as of the date of separation. Assuming there is an argument for a constructive trust relief is unavailable with a zero equalization. Paragraph 3(a)(b) and (c) of the order of Jenkins J. are struck out. The respondent may proceed with her support application. Costs were not requested and will not be given.

Appeal allowed.