ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN:

Saulnier, D. Applicant – and – Postma, K. Respondent

Herbert J., Counsel for the Applicant

Self-represented

HEARD: June 16, 2025

Justice C. Petersen

DECISION ON PRE-JUDGMENT INTEREST

[ 1 ] On June 16, 2025, I issued a Judgment in this family law proceeding ( 2025 ONSC 3569 ). Among other orders, I ordered Ms. Postma to pay Mr. Saulnier pre-judgment interest on the amount of $233,131 from the date of the parties’ separation on March 31, 2020. This order was made pursuant to s.128(1) of the Courts of Justice Act , R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43 (“CJA”).

[ 2 ] The parties have not been able to agree on a final draft Order. The issue in dispute is the applicable pre-judgment interest rate.

[ 3 ] Ms. Postma submits that the applicable rate should be 0.05%, which is the bank rate at the end of the first day of the last month of the quarter preceding the quarter in which Mr. Saulnier’s application was commenced, rounded to the nearest tenth of a percentage point, in accordance with s.127(1) of the CJA .

[ 4 ] Mr. Saulnier submits that the applicable rate should be 2.75%, which is an average of the market rates applicable in each quarter from the date his application was issued.

[ 5 ] The presumptive rate for the pre-judgment interest in this case is 0.05%, per s.127(1) and s.128(1) of the CJA . However, under s.130(1) of the CJA, the court has discretion to apply an interest rate that is higher (or lower) than the rate payable under s.128 of the CJA if the court “considers it just to do so”. The factors for the court to consider are listed in s.130(2) :

(a) changes in market interest rates;

(b) the circumstances of the case;

(c) the fact that an advance payment was made;

(d) the circumstances of medical disclosure by the plaintiff;

(e) the amount claimed and the amount recovered in the proceeding;

(f) the conduct of any party that tended to shorten or to lengthen unnecessarily the duration of the proceeding; and

(g) any other relevant consideration.

[ 6 ] Ms. Postma argues that the facts of the case, the settlement offers she made, the results of the litigation, and the delays caused by Mr. Saulnier when considered in totality do not justify any increase to the presumptive rate of 0.05%.

[ 7 ] I have already accounted for the results of the litigation, Mr. Saulnier’s conduct, Ms. Postma’s settlement offers and Mr. Saulnier’s lack of offers in my costs decision dated September 8, 2025 (2025 ONSC 5125). Those factors will therefore be given little weight: Debora v Debora , 2005 7671 , at para. 50 , aff’d 2006 40663 (ONCA), at para. 93 .

[ 8 ] The remaining applicable factor is the fluctuation in market interest rates over time. The rate remained steady at 0.5% until the third quarter of 2022, when it increased to 1.8%, then 2.8%, then 4%, then 4.8% and finally to 5.3% in the fourth quarter of 2023. It then remained steady at 5.3% until the fourth quarter of 2024, when it dropped to 4.8%. It continued to decrease each quarter of 2025.

[ 9 ] This is a significant fluctuation in the market interest rate. Mr. Saulnier argues that, if I do not average the rates, Ms. Postma will benefit from a windfall. He was entitled to the money on the day they separated in March 2021. He submits that if I fix the pre-judgment interest rate at 0.5%, Ms. Postma will effectively receive the unfair benefit of a low interest loan of the money for five years.

[ 10 ] I agree with Mr. Saulnier that, in the circumstances of this case, it is just to award an average of the rates so that my order more accurately reflects the true prevailing market rate over the entire period. Such an order will appropriately compensate him for the loss of the use of the money, which is the fundamental purpose of a pre-judgment interest award.

[ 11 ] I therefore order that pre-judgment interest be paid at the averaged rate of 2.75%.

[ 12 ] A Final Order will issue, per the draft submitted by Mr. Saulnier, as amended and signed by me.

Justice C. Petersen

Released: March 03, 2026

COURT FILE NO.: FS-21-00000290-0000 (Guelph)

DATE: 2026 03 03

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: Saulnier D. Applicant – and – Postma K. Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Justice C. Petersen

Released: March 03, 2026