Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: FC-21-1525 DATE: 2022/04/06 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: Marje Aksli, Applicant and Neil Brennan, Respondent

BEFORE: Shelston, J.

COUNSEL: Alice Weatherston for the Applicant J. Alison Campbell for the Respondent

HEARD: March 29 and 30, 2022

Endorsement

[1] Each party has filed their own motions seeking various claims for relief on a temporary basis regarding child support, spousal support, sale of the matrimonial home, sale of a motor vehicle, financial disclosure, and costs.

[2] The applicant’s notice of motion seeks the following relief:

(a) an order that commencing on March 1, 2022, and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter, the respondent shall pay the expenses associated with the matrimonial home, including the mortgage and property taxes, in lieu of child support for Mark. (b) an order that commencing on March 1, 2022, and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter, the respondent shall pay the applicant the amount of $4,000 in spousal support. (c) an order that the respondent maintain the applicant as the beneficiary of his life insurance in order to secure support. (d) an order for the sale of the matrimonial home, and specific terms regarding the sale including an order that, after certain agreed-upon expenses are paid, the remaining proceeds to be divided equally with the exception that $100,000 should be deducted from the respondent’s share to be held in trust pending determination of the equalization payment owed by the respondent to the applicant. (e) an order that immediately following the closing of the sale of the matrimonial home, the parties shall list the BMW X5 motor vehicle for sale. (f) an order granting the applicant permission to remove specific joint household contents. (g) an order that the respondent provide specific disclosure, as set out in the notice of motion. (h) an order for costs.

[3] The respondent’s notice of motion seeks the following relief:

(a) an order that the matrimonial home shall be listed for sale immediately with Ms. Diane Allingham, and specific terms regarding the sale including a provision that after the agreed-upon expenses are paid from the proceeds of sale, the sum of $150,000 would be deducted from the proceeds of sale and the balance would be shared equally by the parties. (b) an order imputing an income of $60,000 to the applicant. (c) an order that until the sale of the matrimonial home, the respondent shall pay one half of the mortgage, home insurance and property taxes totaling $1,452.37 in lieu of direct spousal support, and that these payments be considered third-party payments pursuant to the Income Tax Act. (d) an order that, commencing on the first of the month following the closing of the sale of the matrimonial home, based on the applicant’s imputed income of $60,000 and the respondent’s income of $150,000, the respondent shall pay to the applicant the amount of $1,612 per month, as spousal support, and that said spousal support may be varied based on material change in circumstance including the applicant moving to Estonia. (e) an order that the BMW X5 motor vehicle be sold forthwith and that the proceeds be shared equally by the parties. (f) an order for disclosure from the applicant. (g) an order for costs.

[4] At the motion, the applicant withdrew her request for permission to remove specific joint household contents.

Background

[5] The parties began cohabitating in November 2001 and married on December 12, 2001. From 2001 to 2005, the applicant followed the respondent to his various postings throughout Europe. During this period of time, the applicant worked intermittently and cared for the two young children being Jann, born in 2002 and Mark, born in 2004. In 2005, the respondent obtained employment with Global Affairs Canada at which point the family relocated to Ottawa.

[6] From 2005 until 2016, the respondent was the primary wage earner for the family. During this period of time, the applicant obtained additional degrees and diplomas at Algonquin College and at the University of Ottawa. She worked at temporary agencies, on casual contracts as an administrative assistant and researcher, as well as a temporary position as a program officer with Global Affairs Canada in 2016. After the family moved to Washington in 2016, the applicant found secretarial positions at the Canadian embassy. In January 2020, she obtained a temporary contract at the World Bank, where she continued to work until March 17, 2022. The history of the applicant’s income from 2016 indicates the following:

(a) In 2016, she earned $21,733 through Global Affairs Canada in Ottawa, prior to relocating. (b) In 2017, she earned $7,916, including net rental income of $4,382, with respect to the matrimonial home in Ottawa. (c) In 2018, she earned approximately $50,000 USD while working as a temporary assistant in Washington. (d) In 2019, she earned $59,606 USD as a program assistant at the Canadian embassy in Washington. (e) In 2020, she earned $39,215 USD at the World Bank (non-taxable income) and $3,112 CDN. (f) In 2021, she earned $55,960 USD with the World Bank (non-taxable income), the majority of which was earned prior to moving back to Ottawa in August 2021. (g) From July 2021 to March 2022, the applicant earned $15,975 USD (non-taxable income) from the World Bank of which she states that $3,550 was earned in calendar 2022.

[7] The respondent is employed as a foreign service officer by Global Affairs Canada and earns an annual income of approximate $131,637 plus variable performance pay. He also has interests in several family-owned businesses together with a family trust.

[8] In August 2020, the eldest son, Jann, moved back to Ottawa to attend Carleton University. He moved back into the matrimonial home when his parents and Mark returned to Canada after the Washington posting in 2021. In early March 2022, the respondent moved out of the matrimonial home. On March 8, 2022, Jann left the matrimonial home to live with a friend and he is currently completing his second year at Carleton University. The applicant remains in the matrimonial home with Mark, who will graduate from high school in June 2022. He intends to enroll in the Estonian compulsory military service and will live with either the applicant, or her family before starting his training.

Disclosure

[9] In December 2020, both parties had retained lawyers and correspondence was exchanged. From January 2021 to March 2021, prior to the respondent’s Washington posting ending, the parties engaged in a Collaborative Family Law process, but no agreement was reached.

[10] On March 30, 2021, the respondent provided a sworn financial statement dated March 29, 2021, with no documentary evidence to support the value of assets or liabilities on the date of marriage or date of separation and no information or documentation regarding the respondent’s interests in several businesses.

[11] On April 6, 2021, Ms. Weatherston assumed representation of the applicant, and requested the respondent to provide his financial disclosure. On April 27, 2021, Ms. Campbell, counsel for the respondent, replied by email that each party should prepare a financial statement and exchange the financial disclosure with respect to both contested dates of separation. On May 14, 2021, the applicant provided the respondent with a financial statement including the supporting documentations for the calculations in her net family property statement addressing the two different dates of separation. The respondent did not provide the financial disclosure. The applicant’s requests for disclosure continued through May to July 2021 without a response.

[12] On August 20, 2021, the applicant commenced this proceeding. The respondent’s financial statement dated October 27, 2021, provided no disclosure to support the figures in his financial statement regarding his assets and liabilities.

[13] The parties attended a case conference on November 24, 2021, where various issues were addressed, including the sale of the matrimonial home, interim spousal support and disclosure. The court indicated that the parties would continue to agree on the disclosure and that a draft order could be submitted later that day. The applicant prepared a draft order and delivered it by email the same day to the respondent’s counsel. No response was received, and no draft order was ever submitted to the court.

[14] On December 10, 2021, January 14, 2022, and February 3, 2022, the applicant continued to request disclosure from the respondent, including the maximum transferable amount of the respondent’s pension. No disclosure was provided. On March 1, 2021, the applicant served her notice of motion and affidavit returnable March 29, 2022. On March 22, 2022, the respondent served his notice of motion and affidavit.

Applicant’s request for disclosure

[15] Family law has progressed to the stage that parties must provide relevant financial disclosure even without a court order. When a request for relevant disclosure is provided, parties are obligated to provide that disclosure. Financial disclosure is an essential obligation of any family law litigant. To delay disclosure is to delay the resolution of a dispute.

[16] In this case, there is no explanation from the respondent why he still has not provided the financial disclosure regarding his assets and liabilities on the two dates of separation. The parties have been engaged in negotiation since December 2020. Litigation started in August 2021. There is no explanation why the respondent did not reply to the draft disclosure order sent on November 24, 2021. I find that the respondent’s behaviour is unreasonable and has prolonged this litigation.

[17] With respect to the disclosure requested by the applicant, I order the respondent to provide to the applicant, by no later than May 27, 2022, the following disclosure for the reasons set out herein:

(a) Supporting documents confirming the value of his assets and liabilities (with the exception of business valuations) on January 11, 2017, and September 22, 2020. (b) For each business that the respondent has an interest in, including but not limited to, Brennan Contractors & Supply LTD., RGB Developments LTD., Brennan Developments LTD., and Nightingale Developments: i) corporate financial statements from 2018 to 2020 and 2021, once available. ii) tax returns from 2018 to 2020 and 2021, once available. iii) shareholder agreements. iv) share registers; and v) minute books. If any of the above documents are not available, the respondent shall provide written confirmation from his corporate lawyer and/or accountant. (c) A copy of the respondent’s declaration of dependents originally provided to his employer when he was posted to Washington DC in 2016, and any further declarations filed since that date. (d) A statement as to the respondent’s RESP’s investments as of January 11, 2017, September 22, 2020, and March 29, 2022. (e) A copy of the respondent’s 2021 personal income tax return, and a copy of his notice of assessment within 10 days of receiving same. (f) A copy of the maximum transferable amount of the respondent’s pension through is employer pursuant to the Pension Benefits Division Act.

[18] With regards to the applicant’s request for any evidence upon which the respondent relies on with respect to the date of separation, as well as copy of all pleadings with respect to Brennan Developments LTD and Brennan Contractors and Supplies LTD in New Brunswick and in Ontario, I decline to make those orders at this time.

Respondent’s request for disclosure

[19] With respect to the respondent’s request for disclosure from the applicant, most of the documentation requested for the calculation of the net family property has already been provided prior to this motion.

[20] On consent, I order the applicant to provide to the respondent by no later than May 27, 2022, a copy of all communications with potential employers. All other requests for disclosures are dismissed.

Sale of Matrimonial Home

[21] The applicant submits that the respondent has intentionally delayed the sale of the matrimonial home while the respondent denies that he delayed the sale. The respondent submits that he wanted to purchase the applicant’s share in the matrimonial home based on the assertion by the applicant that she planned on returning to Estonia. The applicant denies that she had decided to move permanently to Estonia.

[22] In any event, when the applicant returned to Ottawa in 2021, the parties continued to negotiate. In September 2021, the respondent had the matrimonial home appraised as part of his efforts to obtain financing to buy out the applicant’s share in the matrimonial home. The parties were unable to agree on terms regarding any buyout, and on January 26, 2022, the respondent agreed that the matrimonial home be sold. However, he insisted on a provision that the sale transaction would not close until Mark completed his high school education in June 2022.

[23] The parties agree that the matrimonial home should be listed for sale immediately with Ms. Diane Allingham as their real estate agent, and that the proceeds of sale shall be applied to pay the real estate commission, the outstanding mortgage, reasonable legal fees related to the sale, to reimburse the respondent for the cost of repairs that he is incurring to address the issues identified Ms. Allingham and that most of the net proceeds of sale be released to the parties. The parties disagree on the cost of the repairs, the closing date, certain terms regarding the sale and how much should be retained from the net proceeds of sale prior to the balance being released to the parties.

Repairs

[24] On March 9, 2022, the real estate agent sent the parties an email where she listed the repairs and maintenance that she recommended should be completed before the property is listed for sale. The respondent has agreed to undertake the repairs. The respondent seeks an order that he may incur up to $9,000 of costs, without the consent of the applicant, while the applicant wishes to be able to agree as to what costs are incurred and to be advised as to when the work will be undertaken in the matrimonial home. Both parties agreed that if the costs exceed $9,000, they must consent in advance to those costs being incurred.

[25] At the motion, the respondent indicated that he anticipates that the total cost will be approximately $10,000 and the remaining work mainly consists of painting, stair repairs and a deep cleaning of the home. I find that since the applicant resides in the home, she is to be advised when work will be undertaken. I agree that the respondent may incur costs up to $9,000 without the consent of the applicant but any costs exceeding the amount of $9,000 must be consented by the applicant. I do this to avoid any further disagreement and friction between the parties.

Closing date

[26] The applicant seeks an order that the property be listed for sale without any restrictions on the closing date, while the respondent submits that the closing date should not be before June 30, 2022, when Mark graduates from high school. I do not find that there should be a restriction on the closing date of the sale of the matrimonial home for the following reasons.

[27] Mark is 18 years old, and he is currently completing high school. He plans on joining the military in Estonia when school is over. He sounds like a very independent person. In the event that the matrimonial home sells before the end of the school year, I have no doubt that his mother and father will make necessary arrangements for him to have accommodations until he completes his education.

[28] Furthermore, the parties agree that the necessary repairs will not be completed until Easter and then the property will be listed for sale. By that time, Mark will have approximately ten weeks until the end of June to complete his education. Finally, this property must be sold and placing a restriction on the closing date may impair receiving the highest offer to purchase.

Terms of Sale

[29] The parties disagree regarding the applicant’s request that they will accept the first reasonable offer to purchase the home for $1,250,000 or more, unless the parties otherwise agree in advance and in writing. The respondent opposes any such restriction to permit the parties the most flexibility in accepting any offer regarding the home. I agree that there should be no minimum value restriction on the sale of the matrimonial home and that the real estate agent should determine the listing price. I do so because if a disagreement occurs, an urgent motion may be brought. I will remain seized of any disagreement regarding the listing and sale of the matrimonial home and if I am not available, another judge may be assigned.

[30] At the motion, the applicant consented to the terms set out in paragraph 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the respondent’s notice of motion. I will incorporate these provisions in my order set out herein.

Net Proceeds of Sale

[31] Once the agreed-upon expenses are paid from the net proceeds of sale, the parties anticipate that there will be a significant balance to which each party is entitled to a share. The applicant submits that $100,000 should be deducted from the respondent’s share to pay the equalization payment that he will be required to pay. The remaining balance would be divided equally between the parties.

[32] The respondent submits that the sum of $150,000 should be deducted prior to the net proceeds of sale, being divided equally between the parties, to cover costs of the litigation and any other possible claims.

[33] The applicant submits that she cannot prepare a net family property statement because the respondent has not provided the supporting documentation regarding the value of his assets and liability on the date of marriage and date of separation. Furthermore, the parties do not even agree on the date of separation. The applicant submits that the respondent has a significant employment pension that has been appraised by an actuary for both contested dates of separation, but because the respondent has not provided evidence of the maximum transferable amount of the respondent’s pension, she cannot consider that a pension rollover is a possible partial settlement of the equalization payment. In any event, the applicant indicates that she will be receiving an equalization payment.

[34] The respondent acknowledges that the applicant is entitled to an equalization payment. The question is: what is the equalization payment owed by the respondent to the applicant? Based on the lack of disclosure provided by the respondent, I cannot determine the equalization payment owed by the respondent, but I accept the submission of the applicant that she will be entitled to an equalization payment, and it will be at least $100,000. As such, I order that from the respondent’s share of the net proceeds of sale, the sum of $100,000 be retained in trust pending either the consent of the parties or court order.

[35] With respect to the respondent’s request to retain $150,000 from the proceeds of sale prior to dividing the balance equally, in the respondent’s affidavit material, there is no evidentiary basis why this amount should be retained. I dismiss that claim for relief.

Order regarding the sale of the matrimonial home

[36] Based on the above, I make the following order:

(a) The matrimonial home located at 5 Leonard Ave., Ottawa, ON, shall be listed for sale with real estate agent, Ms. Diane Allingham, at a price recommended by her. (b) All decisions with regards to the listing and sale of the home shall be made by the applicant and the respondent jointly, taking into consideration the advice of Ms. Allingham. (c) The respondent shall pay the costs associated with preparing matrimonial home for sale, as recommended by Ms. Allingham, and shall be able to spend up to $9,000 towards the expenses without the consent of the applicant. In the event that the cost to complete the work exceeds $9,000, both parties must consent to the additional costs. The applicant is to be given notice when any work is going to be performed at the matrimonial home, by either the respondent or a third party retained by the respondent to complete said repairs. (d) Upon the sale of the matrimonial home, the proceeds of sale shall be applied as follows: i) the outstanding mortgage with EQ bank. ii) the real estate commission. iii) the legal fees and disbursements in connection with said sale. iv) the usual adjustment for taxes, utilities, municipal fees, or levies. v) repayment of the repair expenses incurred by the respondent in paragraph (c) herein. vi) The balance of the net proceeds of sale shall be divided as follows: (a) 50% to the applicant. (b) 50% to the respondent less $100,000 to be held in trust pending further order of this court or written agreement of the parties. (e) The applicant may remain resident in the matrimonial home while the matrimonial home is listed for sale, and she shall cooperate with regards to all viewings and arrangements to be made regarding same. (f) The applicant shall ensure that the home remains in a clean and presentable condition to be shown to potential buyers. (g) In the event of a disagreement regarding the listing and sale of the matrimonial home, the parties are to contact the trial coordinator’s office to schedule an urgent motion before me without the necessity of proceeding to a case conference to be heard by myself, or another judge, if I am unavailable. (h) The applicant and the respondent shall each identify the matrimonial home as their principal residence as defined in the Income Tax Act from the date of purchase until the year of the sale of the matrimonial home. If either party fails to designate the matrimonial home as their primary residence, or that the other becomes liable to pay any income tax (capital gains) in relation to the matrimonial home, the party who has failed to designate the matrimonial home shall indemnify the other with respect to any tax they incur.

Sale of the 2016 BMW X5

[37] The parties agree that the 2016 BMW X5 motor vehicle driven by the applicant be sold and the proceeds split equally. The applicant requested an order that a minimum sale price be established before selling the motor vehicle. The respondent disagreed and submitted that the parties will have to agree on the sale price. I agree with the applicant that the parties should have some independent valuation as to the fair market value of the motor vehicle. As the applicant drives the motor vehicle, she should obtain the valuation.

[38] I order that following the closing of the sale of the matrimonial home, the parties shall list the 2016 BMW X5 for sale at a mutually agreed upon price and the proceeds shall be shared equally between the parties.

Child and Spousal Support

Child Support

[39] Based on the respondent’s income estimated at $150,000 and Mark residing in the matrimonial home with the applicant, the table amount of child support payable by the respondent to the applicant is $1,299 per month. The respondent argues that he should not pay any child support as he is paying all the expenses regarding the mortgage, property insurance and municipal taxes, as well as buying food and other expenses related to the matrimonial home. The applicant responds that instead of receiving table child support directly from the respondent, she submits that the respondent should continue to pay the mortgage, property taxes and insurance payments which totals $2,904.75 per month, and that the applicant’s share of those expenses being $1,452.38 per month be considered the respondent’s payment of table child support for Mark.

[40] All parties agreed that once Mark completes high school in June 2022, he intends to travel to Estonia to join the military and that his entitlement to child support will end. It may be revived depending on what decision he makes in the future about his education.

[41] The issue remains how should the respondent meets his obligation to pay table child support for Mark while in the care of the applicant. While the respondent does not want to pay child support directly to the applicant because he is paying the expenses regarding the mortgage, property insurance and municipal taxes, he is asking that the applicant’s share of $1,452.38 be credited towards his spousal support obligation, and that he will make the payments to the third parties accordingly. The end result is that the respondent is not proposing to pay any child support to Mark for the next three months, being April, May and June 2022. I reject that request. The respondent has an obligation to pay child support for Mark’s benefits. I order that the respondent to shall pay to the applicant $1,299 as table child support on April 1, May 1, and June 1, 2022.

Spousal support

[42] The respondent concedes that the applicant has presented a prima facie entitlement to spousal support. As this is a temporary motion, the purpose of spousal support at this stage is to provide the applicant with sufficient support to maintain a reasonable standard of living, based on her needs until the matter proceeds to trial.

[43] The respondent argues that the applicant should have an imputed income of $60,000. The respondent calculates the applicant’s imputed income of $60,000 by determining that she earned $10,000 USD in 2022 from her contract with the World Bank; that converting that sum to Canadian dollars results in an amount of $12,884 and considering that the income from the World Bank is non-taxable, then grossing up the sum of $12,884 for income tax to arrive at a final amount of $15,043.22. The respondent submits that in the first quarter of 2022, the applicant should have an imputed income of $15,043.22 and multiplying that for the entire year results in an annual imputed income of $60,172.88. I reject the respondent’s calculation because the determination that she earned $10,000 USD in 2022 is pure speculation and has no corroborative evidence.

[44] The applicant has produced a letter from her former employer confirming that from July 1, 2021, to March 17, 2022, she was paid $15,975 USD non-taxable. The applicant submits that her total income from all sources in 2022 was work related to a contract with the World Bank, which paid her $3,550 USD ($4,473 CDN.) In the applicant’s financial statement sworn March 1, 2022, she indicates that she had ten days of work in 2022 with a per diem of $355 per day, for a total of $3,550 USD. The applicant submits that the income that she earned to date in 2022 is $3,550 USD, and that her last contract with the World Bank expired on January 27, 2022. Based on the sworn affidavit, and financial statement of the applicant, I find that she earned $3,550 USD in 2022.

[45] The applicant has provided a chart of her efforts to find employment starting from July 23, 2020, up to March 21, 2022. Since January 2022, she has made numerous applications for employment and had five interviews. It appears that the applicant is making bona fide efforts to find employment and that she shall continue to do so. At this time, I do not find that she has intentionally avoided seeking employment and that she is underemployed. She no longer has the contract with the World Bank, she is back in Ottawa after a five-year posting to Washington, and has not been able to find employment despite her best efforts. Based on the above, I reject the submission to impute an income to the applicant. I anticipate that the applicant will be able to obtain employment in 2022, and that this temporary order may be subject to variation based on the applicant obtaining employment.

[46] Counsel have provided me with DivorceMate calculations of child and spousal support. Based on the respondent earning $150,000, the applicant earning $4,473, the respondent paying $1,299 per month representing the child support for Mark, the Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines (“SSAG”) provides a range of spousal support being $3,523(low), $3,912(mid) and $4,327(high). In determining an appropriate quantum of spousal support on a temporary basis, the court is not to consider all of the monthly expenses such as holidays, gifts etc. I have considered the applicant’s financial statement sworn March 1, 2022, where she declares that her monthly expenses are $2,645 per month based on the applicant and Mark remaining in the matrimonial home, and the respondent effectively paying for most of the expenses except her groceries. Once the matrimonial home sells, and the applicant obtains new accommodations, she will be able to provide a financial statement that provides her housing and utility expenses, as well as a more complete financial statement to indicate what her needs will be at that time.

[47] I find that the sum of $4,000 per month, being slightly above the mid-range of the SSAG’s, is an appropriate figure on a temporary basis. The spousal support, coupled with the child support, will result in the applicant having 51% of the net disposable income and the respondent 48% of the net disposable income. In the calculations set out herein, I have rounded the amount to be paid, in addition to the third-party payments to be made by the respondent.

[48] The respondent’s position is that he should receive credit for $1,452.37 per month, representing the applicant’s half of the mortgage, taxes, and property insurance costs towards his spousal support obligation. I agree with the respondent’s position as he is paying for these expenses and will be doing so until the property is sold.

[49] I agree that commencing on April 1, 2022, and on the first day of each month thereafter until the last day of the month of the closing of the sale of the matrimonial home, the respondent shall pay the sum of $1,452.37 representing half of the monthly mortgage, taxes, and property insurance costs and that said payments shall be considered to be third-party payments to the applicant, pursuant to sections 56.1(2) and 60.1(2) of the Income Tax Act and shall be tax-deductible to the respondent in the amount of $1,452.37 per month and taxable to the applicant in the same amount each month commencing April 1, 2022.

[50] However, I reject the respondent’s submission that this is the sole amount of spousal support that he should pay on a temporary basis. Based on my finding that the sum of $4,000 per month is the appropriate amount to be paid as spousal support, I order the respondent to pay to the applicant $2,547.63 per month, commencing on April 1, 2022, and on the first day of each month thereafter until the sale of the matrimonial home. Once Mark is no longer entitled to child support, the respondent shall maintain the payments ordered herein, until the closing of the sale of the matrimonial home.

[51] Once the matrimonial home is sold, I order that the respondent shall pay to the applicant spousal support in the amount of $4,000 per month per month payable on the first day of each and every month thereafter until varied by further court order or a written agreement between the parties.

Life Insurance

[52] The applicant requests an order that the respondent maintain her as the beneficiary of his life insurance in order to secure support on a temporary basis. The respondent’s financial statement indicates that he has two life insurance policies with one naming the applicant as the beneficiary with ManuLife-Universal life policy in the face amount of $541,154.27 and a second policy, also with ManuLife, has a face amount of $400,000 where he is the beneficiary of said policy. Despite the respondent’s financial statement indicating that he pays a monthly premium for supplementary death benefit, his financial statement does not indicate any supplemental death benefit.

[53] I agree that life insurance should be put in place to secure the respondent’s obligation to pay child and spousal support until June 30, 2022, and thereafter, temporary spousal support until further order of this court. The applicant did not request a specific amount of insurance.

[54] I order that the respondent shall designate the applicant as the beneficiary of his ManuLife-Universal life insurance policy with a face amount of $541,154.27 and that the respondent provide the applicant with proof of said designation within 10 days of this endorsement.

Affidavit of Documents and Questioning

[55] During the motion, I advised the parties that they should exchange affidavit of documents and proceed to questioning. I order that the parties shall serve, by no later than July 22, 2022, a sworn affidavit of documents and that the parties may that’s today to April proceed to questioning, limited to five hours for each party.

Costs

[56] I request the parties to attempt to settle the issue of costs by no later than April 18, 2022. If they are able to settle the issue of costs, they are to inform the court. If they are unable to do so, I order that the applicant provide her cost submissions not to exceed three pages plus a detailed bill of costs and any offers to settle by April 25, 2022. I order the respondent to provide his cost submissions by May 3, 2022, said submissions not to exceed three pages plus a detailed bill of costs and any offers to settle.

Released: April 7, 2022