Court File and Parties
Court File No.: FS-21-00000290-0000
Date of Judgment: June 16, 2025
Court: Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Between:
Delby Saulnier (Applicant)
James Herbert, for the Applicant
and
Kelly Postma (Respondent)
Sean Plat and Brittany Thompson, for the Respondent
Heard: December 9-13, 16, 2024 and February 6, 7 and 13, 2025
Judge: Jennifer Petersen
Table of Contents
- Overview
- Background Facts
- Parties’ Claims and Positions
- Witnesses’ Credibility
- Mr. Saulnier’s Credibility
- Ms. Postma’s Credibility
- Enforceability of the Domestic Agreement
- Legislative Framework
- The Law of Contract
- Lack of Independent Legal Advice
- Failure to Disclose
- Should the Domestic Agreement be set aside?
- Mr. Saulnier’s Contractual Entitlements
- Relevant Contract Provisions
- Interpretation Issues
- Principles of Contractual Interpretation
- Is the Contract Ambiguous with Respect to the Nature of Mr. Saulnier’s Interest?
- First Exception to Paragraph 12: A Matrimonial Home
- Second Exception to Paragraph 12: The Farmhouse Property
- Is the Contract Ambiguous with Respect to the Valuation Date?
- What is Mr. Saulnier’s Entitlement under the Domestic Agreement?
- What was the value of the farmhouse on March 31, 2020?
- What amounts should be deducted from the property value?
- Should there be an adjustment of shares based on unequal contributions?
- Conclusion
- Is Ms. Postma Entitled to Reimbursement of Post-Separation Expenses?
- Background Facts
- Is there a basis for reimbursement of post-separation expenses?
- Is Mr. Saulnier Entitled to Reimbursement of Expenses Post-Separation?
- Is Mr. Saulnier Liable for Damages for Conversion?
- Antique Hutch, Church Bench and Plant Bench
- Boat and Trailer
- Tractor
- Dining Room Table
- Five Dining Room Chairs
- Five Couches
- Yamaha Receiver
- Bose Speakers
- Amplifier and Bass Guitar
- Freezer
- Bed Frame and Box Spring
- Strawberry Shortcake Collection
- Miscellaneous Other Items
- Conclusion
- Is Ms. Postma Liable for Damages for Spoliation?
- Background Facts
- Analytical Framework
- Remedy
- Is Ms. Postma Liable for Damages for Intrusion Upon Seclusion?
- Analytical Framework
- Analysis
- Remedy
- Conclusions
- Costs
OVERVIEW
Background Facts
[1] The applicant, Delby Saulnier, and the respondent, Kelly Postma, met in June 2013 and began dating shortly thereafter. They each had children from previous relationships.
[2] Ms. Postma was a real estate agent, real estate investor, and landlord. Mr. Saulnier was operating a kitchen renovations business. He was substantially in debt. He owned a house but had fallen behind on his utility bills and mortgage payments. In 2014, the bank threatened to foreclose on the mortgage loan. Ms. Postma made him a series of six interest-free loans totalling $203,000. He repaid her the money by selling his house in June 2014. He then moved into a rental property owned by her.
[3] The parties started living together in mid-2015 in a house owned by Ms. Postma in Guelph. Later that year, they moved, with their respective children, to a rural farmhouse on 11.84 acres of land in Puslinch, Ontario.
[4] Ms. Postma entered into an agreement to purchase the farmhouse for $800,000 on June 18, 2015. She obtained mortgage financing in the amount of $621,670 and took possession of the property on October 15, 2015. Title to the property was registered in her name alone.
[5] Mr. Saulnier did not contribute money to the purchase or transactional costs. However, over the next 2.5 years, he invested considerable labour and skill toward extensive renovations to the farmhouse. He also constructed a workshop in the basement of a barn on the property. Ms. Postma did some work (mostly demolition) on the farmhouse renovations. Except for the barn basement workshop, she financed all the renovations, the cost of which exceeded $200,000.
[6] In 2017, Mr. Saulnier decided to change careers. He sold his kitchen renovations business to a friend named Phil Collier for $50,000. Mr. Collier rented the barn basement workshop for the business. Mr. Saulnier took courses to become a registered real estate agent. He obtained his realtor’s licence and started working with Ms. Postma in real estate sales in the spring of 2018.
[7] The parties executed a Domestic Agreement on April 10, 2018. They signed the contract in anticipation of their future marriage, but also in contemplation of the possibility that they might one day separate or divorce.
[8] In the contract, the parties granted each other reciprocal indemnifications for child support and mutual comprehensive waivers of spousal support. They agreed to make equal financial contributions to the carrying costs of the farmhouse property. They also agreed that, with the exception of the farmhouse, they were not entitled to a share of any property or a share of the value of any property owned by the other. They expressly agreed that there would be no division of their assets and no equalization of their net family properties in the event that they separated after marrying.
[9] The Domestic Agreement contains four Schedules that pertain exclusively to the farmhouse property. The first three Schedules itemize the parties’ financial and labour contributions to the acquisition and improvement of the farmhouse, and their respective contributions to the carrying costs of the property, up until April 2018. Schedule D is entitled, “FORMULA to dissolve property.” That formula entitles Mr. Saulnier to a share in the equity of the farmhouse property — whether his share constitutes a beneficial ownership interest in the property or merely a monetary interest in the value of the property is a central issue in this litigation.
[10] On December 18, 2018, Ms. Postma and her two children moved out of the farmhouse and back to Guelph. She did not take all her personal belongings and furniture with her. Mr. Saulnier continued living at the farmhouse with his three children. The parties did not view the cessation of their cohabitation as a breakdown of their relationship.
[11] In the fall of 2019, Mr. Saulnier began construction of a new driveshed on the farmhouse property. The original driveshed had been destroyed by a storm in 2017. Ms. Postma received insurance funds to rebuild, which she used to pay the costs of materials. She also used the insurance funds to pay Mr. Saulnier $40,353 for his labour and to pay third-party contractors, who ultimately completed the work. In total, the construction of the new driveshed cost Ms. Postma just over $101,000. Although the parties disagree about the extent of the work performed by Mr. Saulnier on the driveshed, by all accounts, his efforts were considerable. The parties disagree about whether $40,353 adequately compensated him for his labour.
[12] The parties’ relationship continued while they were living apart from December 2018 until March 2020, at which point they decided to “consciously uncouple”. Although the prospect of reconciliation was contemplated (at least by Ms. Postma) up until May 31, 2021, they never reconciled. The parties agree for the purposes of this proceeding that their date of separation is March 31, 2020.
[13] When the parties signed the Domestic Agreement on April 10, 2018, they anticipated that Ms. Postma would retain possession of the farmhouse if they broke up. The agreement provides Mr. Saulnier with two months to remove his personal possessions from the property in the event of their separation. However, by the time the parties separated in March 2020, Ms. Postma and her children had already moved to Guelph. Mr. Saulnier wanted to continue living at the farmhouse with his children. Ms. Postma did not immediately request that he leave. Post-separation, they both contributed to pay the carrying costs of the property, but Mr. Saulnier paid a greater share. He had a tenant rent one of the bedrooms and the rental income was used to defray the parties’ carrying costs.
[14] Ms. Postma wanted to sever a one-acre lot from the farmhouse property and sell it to a third party for profit. She discussed this with Mr. Saulnier. She applied for the severance in October 2020. It was conditionally approved by the Township of Puslinch on December 8, 2020. Ms. Postma hired professionals to satisfy some of the conditions, such as the requirement to conduct an environmental assessment. She and Mr. Saulnier cooperated to ensure that a key condition was met, namely securing a neighbour’s consent to obtain a by-law variance from the Township.
[15] Post-separation, the parties tried to negotiate a second contract to supplement their April 10, 2018 Domestic Agreement. Drafts of the proposed second agreement included a term requiring Mr. Saulnier to assume responsibility for paying 100% of the carrying costs of the farmhouse property. Drafts also included terms entitling Mr. Saulnier to an equal share of the net proceeds of sale of the severed lot, which would be put toward a downpayment to purchase the farmhouse property from Ms. Postma. The proposed second agreement was never executed. The parties’ negotiations broke down in late May 2021, when Ms. Postma discovered that Mr. Saulnier was romantically involved with another woman.
[16] The severance application process cost Ms. Postma over $40,000. Her application was ultimately approved on August 10, 2021. By that time, the parties were no longer on speaking terms. She sold the severed lot to third parties on September 13, 2021 for $800,000. She did not give Mr. Saulnier any part of the net proceeds of sale.
[17] Ms. Postma had been working with a lawyer during the parties’ negotiations for a proposed second domestic contract. In June 2021, she instructed her lawyer to write to Mr. Saulnier, demanding that he leave the farmhouse within five days. Mr. Saulnier refused. He commenced this family law Application on August 24, 2021. He and his children continued living in the farmhouse (on the remaining 10.84 acres of land) until May 3, 2022. Ms. Postma was required to bring a motion and obtain a court order for him to vacate.
[18] Title to the farmhouse property is still registered in Ms. Postma’s name alone. She has paid all the carrying costs of the property and has also paid for further renovations to the property since Mr. Saulnier moved out in May 2022. She now uses it as an investment property and rents it on Airbnb.