R. An

Following a five-day family law trial where the respondent was entirely successful, the respondent sought full recovery costs of $139,675.71.

The court found that the respondent beat her offers to settle and that the applicant acted in bad faith by hiding income, failing to make disclosure, and advancing spurious claims to drain the respondent's resources.

The court awarded the respondent her full claimed costs of $139,675.71, enforceable through the Family Responsibility Office as child and spousal support.

The parties separated after a 20-year marriage.

The applicant husband claimed he had no assets, lived on loans from friends, and sought an unequal division of net family property in his favour.

The respondent wife claimed a resulting trust in the matrimonial home, equalization, and support, alleging the husband hid assets and income.

The court found the husband failed to make full and frank disclosure, hid foreign assets, and received substantial undisclosed income and gifts.

The court granted the wife a resulting trust in the matrimonial home, imputed an annual income of $349,544 to the husband, awarded the wife a lump sum spousal support payment of $434,784, and ordered the net proceeds of the matrimonial home be paid to her in satisfaction of her claims.

The applicants brought a motion to enforce Minutes of Settlement and a consent order requiring the respondents to pay $259,570.38.

The respondents brought a cross-motion to set aside the settlement and orders, arguing they were induced to settle by a material misrepresentation regarding whether one of the applicants was a lessee of the business premises.

The court found no misrepresentation occurred, and even if it had, it was not material to the settlement.

The court dismissed the cross-motion, found the respondents in breach of the settlement, and ordered them to pay the settlement funds plus interest and costs.