Court File and Parties
Court File No.: CV-25-00102230-R000 Heard: 2026-03-11
Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
Re: Andrew Duong, Applicant
- and -
Helen Nguyen, Respondent/Moving Party
Before: Associate Justice Kamal
Counsel: Paul Jakubiak, for the Applicant Jennifer E. Jolly, for the Respondent
Reasons for Decision
[1] This is a Reference in a family law proceeding.
What is a Reference?
[2] Rule 54 of the Rules of Civil Procedure permits a judge at any time in a proceeding to direct a reference of the whole proceeding or a reference to determine an issue where,
(a) all affected parties consent;
(b) a prolonged examination of documents or an investigation is required that, in the opinion of the judge, cannot conveniently be made at trial; or
(c) a substantial issue in dispute requires the taking of accounts.
[3] A judge may also, at any time in a proceeding, direct a reference to determine an issue relating to,
(a) the taking of accounts;
(b) the conduct of a sale;
(c) the appointment by the court of a guardian or receiver, or the appointment by a person of an attorney under a power of attorney;
(d) the conduct of a guardianship or receivership or the exercise of the authority of an attorney acting under a power of attorney; or
(e) the enforcement of an order.
[4] The procedure for a Reference is set out in Rule 55 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. This includes the direction that a referee shall, subject to any directions contained in the order directing the reference, devise and adopt the simplest, least expensive and most expeditious manner of conducting the reference.
[5] The authority for the Reference derives from the order directing the reference.
[6] Rule 1(7) of the Family Law Rules states that if these rules do not cover a matter adequately, the court may give directions, and the practice shall be decided by analogy to these rules, by reference to the Courts of Justice Act and the Act governing the case and, if the court considers it appropriate, by reference to the Rules of Civil Procedure.
[7] Accordingly, References are permitted in family law proceedings.
Overview of this Reference
[8] On November 19, 2025, the Honourable Justice Sirivar ordered that the property municipally as 687 Capricorn Circle, Manotick, (Part Block 170 Plan 4M1641 Parts 3 and 4) shall be sold. Justice Sirivar set out specific conditions.
[9] Justice Sirivar further ordered that if the parties are unable to agree on any further terms, the matter shall be promptly referred to an Associate Justice in Ottawa for a decision on a Reference. Furthermore, Justice Sirivar directed that any disputes regarding the distribution of the proceeds of sale will be determined on a Reference to the Associate Justice.
Background
[10] The parties purchased a house located at 687 Capricorn Circle, which they owned as tenants in common. The Respondent held an 80% interest, and the Applicant held a 20% interest.
[11] Shortly after purchasing the home in 2019, the parties separated.
[12] As mentioned above, Justice Sirivar ordered that the property be sold and set out specific conditions related to the sale of the property.
[13] The parties signed the listing agreement in accordance with Justice Sirivar's Order, and the house sold in early January for $647,000, with a closing date of March 12, 2026.
[14] Tanya Carlton is the lawyer for the real estate transaction.
[15] Ms. Carlton reached out to the Applicant, but he did not sign the necessary documents to retain her or to close the sale.
[16] As such, the Respondent seeks an Order that she have sole signing authority to sign any documents relating to the sale, direct Ms. Carlton to pay specific expenses from the proceeds of the sale and then distribute the proceeds of the sale.
Conduct of the Applicant
[17] The evidence before me is clear that the Applicant has not appropriately participated in the sale of the home.
[18] Ms. Carlton reached out to the Applicant, but he has not signed the necessary documents to retain her or to close the sale.
[19] The Applicant has not answered the phone readily or responded to email messages from the real estate agent.
[20] On February 27, 2026, the Applicant spoke to the real estate agent, Kevin Lai, and advised that he would be signing the necessary documents for the sale of the house, but that he would be reporting to jail on Monday, March 2, 2026.
[21] The evidence before me does not actually demonstrate that the Applicant reported for jail or is incarcerated. The Respondent has not been notified by victim services that the Applicant is incarcerated.
[22] Accordingly, in order to avoid a failed real estate transaction tomorrow, it is appropriate to grant an order that the Respondent have sole signing authority to sign any documents relating to the sale.
Distribution of Proceeds of Sale
[23] In order to have the transaction close, specific expenses from the proceeds of the sale need to be paid out first.
[24] The evidence before me includes the Funds Summary prepared by Ms. Carlton, the Statement of Adjustments, the real estate agent's commission invoice, and the mortgage discharge summary.
[25] The parties will receive $636,089.87 from the purchaser on closing.
[26] From that amount, expenses and disbursements need to be paid.
[27] It is appropriate to direct that Ms. Carlton pay the following expenses from the proceeds of the sale:
a. Real estate commission owing;
b. Adjustments for taxes, utilities, municipal fees or levies;
c. Any amount required to discharge encumbrances, including the mortgage in favour of B2B Bank; and
d. Legal fees and disbursements relating to the sale, and all other sale adjustments.
[28] Ms. Carlton has calculated the net proceeds to be $250,161.34.
[29] Justice Sirivar's Order provides that the Applicant is to receive 20% of the net proceeds of the sale, less 20% of the mortgage payments and home insurance premiums, and the Respondent shall receive 80% of the net proceeds, plus 20% of the mortgage payments and home insurance premiums.
[30] The Annual Mortgage Statements for 2021 to 2025 were provided in evidence. They show that the Respondent paid the following:
| Year | Principal Paid | Interest Paid | Escrow (Tax) Payments Paid |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | $16,605.13 | $8,020.58 | $3,960.63 |
| 2022 | $18,281.56 | $7,430.48 | $275.74 |
| 2023 | $16,574.01 | $7,137.73 | $10,049.52 |
| 2024 | $16,872.01 | $6,839.73 | $1,449.70 |
| 2025 | $16,835.64 | $7,525.99 | $4,733.21 |
| Total | $85,168.35 | $36,954.51 | $20,468.80 |
[31] The total amount paid from 2021 to 2025 towards the mortgage is $142,591.66.
[32] From this total, the amounts paid between January 1 and April 4, 2021, need to be subtracted to accord with Justice Sirivar's Order, as she specifies that the Respondent will receive 20% of the mortgage payments made since April 4, 2021.
[33] The mortgage statement for 2021 shows that the Respondent's total payments were $1,049.86 every two weeks. The total amount to be subtracted is $6,299.16 (6 x $1,049.86).
[34] The mortgage was up for renewal in 2025, and the Respondent signed for a one-year open mortgage, which resulted in bi-weekly payments of $1,561.88 every two weeks.
[35] Since April 4, 2021, the total mortgage payments made by the Respondent are $142,540.18 ($142,591.66 - $6,299 +$6,247.52), 20% of which, or $28,508.04, is to be subtracted from the Applicant's 20% share of the net proceeds and paid to the Respondent.
[36] Justice Sirivar's Order also provides that the Respondent is to receive 20% of the insurance premiums she paid towards the house. The Respondent paid the following for house insurance:
2021 - $1,151.50 2022 - $1,313.68 2023 - $1,368.65 2024 - $2,058.51 2025 and 2026 - $978.48
[37] The total $6,870.82, of which 20% is to be subtracted from the Applicant's 20% net proceeds from the sale and paid to the Respondent.
[38] Ms. Carlton has calculated the net proceeds to be $250,161.34.
[39] In accordance with Justice Sirivar's Order, the Respondent is to receive 80%, or $200,129.07, plus Justice Sirivar's cost award of $5,475, plus $28,508.04 for the Applicant's share of the mortgage, plus $1,374.17 for the Applicant's share of the insurance premiums that the Respondent paid.
[40] The Applicant is to receive $50,032.27, his 20% share of the net proceeds minus $5,475 to satisfy the cost award, minus $28,508.04 for his share of the mortgage payments, minus $1,374.17 for his share of the insurance payments the Respondent made.
[41] Therefore, the Respondent's share of net proceeds is $235,486.28. The Applicant's share of net proceeds is $14,675.06.
[42] In considering whether there are any adjustments to be made before or after closing, and to ensure the transaction does not fail tomorrow, any shortfall or overage in these amounts will be shared equally between the parties.
Costs
[43] The Respondent sought costs in the amount of $6,158.50. Her position was that the Applicant's conduct was unreasonable and led to unnecessary litigation.
[44] The Applicant submitted that no costs should be ordered.
[45] Section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act states that the costs of and incidental to a proceeding or a step in a proceeding are in the discretion of the court, and the court may determine by whom and to what extent the costs shall be paid.
[46] As this is a Reference arising in a family law proceeding, I am guided by Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules. Rule 24 allows me to deal with costs in a summary manner.
[47] There is a presumption that a successful party is entitled to the costs of a step in a case.
[48] In my view, the Applicant acted unreasonably, and the court's involvement in this matter should have been avoided. The Respondent should be entitled to costs on a substantial indemnity basis.
[49] Therefore, the Applicant shall pay costs in the amount of $5,610.45, to be paid to the Respondent from the Applicant Andrew Duong's share of the proceeds of sale.
Order
The Respondent, Helen Nguyen, shall have the sole signing authority to sign any documents relating to the sale of 687 Capricorn Circle, Manotick (Part Block 170, Plan 4M1641, Parts 3 and 4).
The Respondent, Helen Nguyen, shall direct Tanya L Carton, the lawyer who has carriage of the sale, to pay these expenses from the proceeds of the sale of 687 Capricorn Circle:
a) Real estate commission owing;
b) Adjustments for taxes, utilities, municipal fees or levies;
c) Any amount required to discharge encumbrances, including the mortgage in favour of B2B Bank;
d) Legal fees and disbursements relating to the sale, and all other sale adjustments.
- The remaining proceeds will be distributed as follows:
a) The Respondent, Helen Nguyen, will receive $235,486.28.
b) The Applicant, Andrew Duong, will receive $14,675.06.
Any shortfall or overage in these amounts will be shared equally between the parties.
- Cost in the amount of $5,610.45 to be paid to the Respondent from the Applicant Andrew Duong's share of the proceeds of sale.
Associate Justice Kamal
Date: March 11, 2026