SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Ernesto Monte, Applicant
-and-
Anna Skalko-Monte, Respondent
BEFORE: F.L. Myers J.
COUNSEL:
L. Mongillo, counsel, for the applicant
P. Pellman, counsel, for the respondent
HEARD: December 8, 2015
ENDORSEMENT
1Both parties claim substantial albeit mixed success and make costs submissions accordingly.
2Costs are ultimately discretionary under the Family Law Rules. I decline to exercise that discretion in favour of either party.
3Rather than reciting the details, I note only that both parties’ evidence were riddled with untruths. Mr. Monte’s evidence that he is a squatter and has earned no revenue for the past three plus years stands out. But it was met by Ms Skalko’s treatment of her business’s bottomless shareholder’s loan account. The unexplained role of Ms Ricci, the wilful and repeated “revenue dumps” to avoid or evade corporate and personal taxation, their efforts to avoid Workers’ Comp premiums and employee withholding obligations, their knowing assistance to Ms Skalko’s brother to hide income from his disability benefits provider, and Mr. Monte’s knowing assistance to Ms. Jones to breach her duties to her employer in Montreal are also relevant. The parties were quite comfortable in court explaining apparently unusual transactions by discussing how they took steps to break, avoid, or evade whatever laws stood in their way to limit their ability to use money as they wished. Finally, Ms Skalko’s determination to ignore orders of Goodman and Stevenson JJ. were also notable. She was determined to avoid financial transparency and accoutnability by living in cash despite an express order to the contrary. In all, both
parties cared little about the law before and during these proceedings. Rather, they seemed to want to use the court’s process to hurt and impoverish the other with little concern for truth or justice. As such they will each bear their own costs.
F.L. Myers, J.
Date: December 11, 2015