P. Skeggs

The mother brought a motion seeking the return of disputed chattels from the matrimonial home, where the father currently resides.

The father opposed the motion, arguing he needed the furniture to care for the children during his access and potential future custody, and noted he was facing domestic assault charges.

The court dismissed the mother's request for the disputed items, finding no urgent need and that the children were adequately furnished at her residence.

The court did, however, order the return of certain agreed-upon items to the mother.

The moving party sought an order under the Partition Act compelling the sale of a matrimonial home following separation.

The responding spouse opposed the sale, arguing that competing claims regarding ownership and the validity of two marriage contracts created substantial rights that could be prejudiced by an immediate sale.

Evidence suggested the responding spouse, an elderly individual residing in the home with a permanently disabled adult child, would suffer hardship if required to relocate before trial.

The court held that while co-owners have a prima facie right to partition and sale, the discretion under the Partition Act allows refusal where hardship or oppression would result.

Given unresolved issues regarding ownership and the potential prejudice to the responding spouse’s rights under family law claims, the motion for sale was dismissed.

The respondent son brought a motion to disqualify the applicant's solicitor due to a conflict of interest.

The solicitor had previously acted for the respondent mother in the transfer of her property, but was now representing the applicant in an application to declare the mother incapable of managing property.

The court found that the solicitor was in a conflict of interest because he was attacking the legal work done during the first retainer and could potentially be called as a witness regarding the mother's capacity.

The motion was granted and the solicitor was removed as counsel.