Court File and Parties
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Shawn Nicholas Garo Markaroglu (Applicant)
AND
Leah Marie Looby (Respondent)
BEFORE: Justice Marc R. Labrosse
COUNSEL: Shawn Markaroglu, Self-Represented John Allan, for the Respondent
HEARD: April 9, 2026
Endorsement
1There are two motions before the court dealing with disclosure and partition and sale.
Applicant’s Disclosure Motion
2The Applicant moves for the following disclosure:
a. The children's residential address.
b. The children's current and past daycare provider's contact information from July 2021 to present.
c. Ms. Looby's full (not simplified) tax returns from 2021-present, including the missing pages (3-7) from the T1 general from the years 2021-present.
d. A complete copy of Ms. Looby's record of employment (ROE) or other evidence of termination, pursuant to the Ontario Family Law Rules 13 (3.1) 2.i., including the missing ROEs from employment that Ms. Looby terminated voluntarily.
e. The Respondent's unredacted medical records from the Deep River District Hospital, relating to her family violence of punching through a window on September 10, 2018.
f. Disclosure of all debts including any accrued legal liability from all sources including Legal Aid and legal counsel.
g. Enforcement of financial disclosure and information about the children.
h. Direction of the Court following the Respondent's failure to comply with disclosure orders, or alternatively, for the Respondent to be held in contempt of Court, or that this Court may strike all or part of her pleadings in accordance with section 1(8) of the Ontario Family Law Rules.
3I highlight the following:
a. The address where the children live has already been given (para. 2a).
b. The respondent consents to the relief sought in paras. 2c, 2d, 2f.
c. The relief sought in paras. 2g and 2f relates to possible defaults by the respondent and findings of contempt. It is premature.
4With respect to para. 2b and the daycare providers, the respondent agreed to provide the contact information for the current daycare provider who are her parents. Also, although the respondent questioned the relevance of providing daycare information back to July 2021, it was not really opposed. I conclude that the respondent can provide whatever information she can find on the daycare providers that were used by the parties while the respondent was still in Ontario commencing in July 2021.
5With respect to the hospital records at para 2e, the Respondent conceded that the request for the specific hospital records of September 10, 2018, dealing with family violence was relevant and properly focused. It meets the Wigmore test. The respondent will request the records. The Respondent’s counsel will receive the documents and forward them to the Applicant. The only redactions will be those made by the hospital. If the Respondent proposes to redact anything further, the matter will first be brought back to Justice Labrosse for a type of O’Connor hearing.
6The parties agreed at the motion that the disclosure would be provided by April 30, 2026 as oral reasons were given. If it has not already been done, the ordered disclosure will be provided by May 8, 2026.
Respondent’s Disclosure Motion
7The respondent moves for the following relief:
a. Receipts and invoices to match identified repairs and renovations.
b. List of names and ages of occupants since the valuation date, and the dates and periods of occupancy.
c. Dates and amounts of rent paid by the said occupants and copy of tenant insurance policy.
d. Copies of emails/correspondence sent to persons/institutions including RCMP, for disclosure regarding the Respondent and/or the children, including attachments to the said emails, if any.
e. Copies of responses from the said persons/institutions.
f. Copy of Applicant’s Appeal Record to the Superior Court of Justice against the Ontario Court of Justice decision and sentence.
g. Copy of the Superior Court of Justice decision that dismissed the Appeal.
h. Copy of request for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal and related documents.
i. The partition and sale of the jointly owned matrimonial home under the Partition Act.
j. Closing of the sale and purchase within 30-60 days of a firm sale, to maximize exposure, maintain negotiating leverage and reduce risk.
k. Following the disbursements, discharges, etc., the real estate lawyers of the parties shall ensure that the net proceeds of sale is paid into court, to await further orders.
l. Proof of Intentional Infliction of Mental Suffering and Family Violence by Respondent.
8I highlight the following:
a. The applicant consented to the relief sough in paras. 7a, 7b, 7c, 7f, 7g, 7h.
9The court provides the following rulings in respect of the Respondent’s motion:
a. Para. 7d – The purpose of this disclosure request relates to steps taken by the Applicant after I provided him with access to information about the children. The evidence provided alleges that the Applicant misused that access. There is an evidentiary basis for the request, and it is relevant to parenting. Thus, the Applicant shall provide copies of correspondence that he sent after November 27, 2025 to various authorities, institutions and third parties concerning the respondent and the children.
b. Para 7e – The applicant will provide the responses that he received from the various authorities, institutions and third parties to whom he has written about the respondent. This is also a proportionate and relevant request.
c. Para 7l – The respondent seeks particulars concerning the applicant’s claim of intentional infliction of mental suffering. While the applicant states that those particulars form part of his Notice of Application, this is the type of relief that a party could normally proceed to questioning on. In this case, the more efficient way of allowing the respondent to be fully apprised of the claim is to order a will-say statement. The applicant will provide a will-say statement concerning his evidence as it relates to his proof of intentional infliction of mental suffering and family violence by the respondent. He will also provide a copy of any document he relies upon to make out his claim.
d. The parties agreed at the motion that the disclosure would be provided by April 30, 2026 as oral reasons were given. If it has not already been done, the ordered disclosure will be provided by May 8, 2026.
Partition and Sale
10While the parties initially addressed the issue as having been principally agreed to, it became apparent that they were apart on several issues. The parties agreed to provide me with their respective draft orders and that I would adjudicate the term of the sale of the matrimonial home.
11I have also reviewed the parties’ respective affidavits for the sale of the matrimonial home to arrive at an order that is as just as possible.
12At the motion, the parties did not agree on the closing date and the listing date. As the applicant made submissions on the issues surrounding partition and sale, it became obvious that they did not agree on much more.
13I have reviewed the draft orders for each party and conclude that in the circumstances, the following shall apply to the listing and sale of the matrimonial home:
a. The property shall be listed for sale by June 1, 2026 with Patricia Newman for 90 days.
b. The intended closing date shall be August 1, 2026 with a goal of being 60 days following the acceptance of an offer.
c. The property shall be listed for sale for $350,000.
d. The parties shall use Joshua Shanbaum as the lawyer for the transaction.
e. Each party shall act reasonably and cooperate with the realtor, including signing the Sales and Purchase Agreement, etc.
f. The respondent will take the necessary steps to discharge the legal aid lien registered against the property.
g. Following the disbursements, discharges, etc., the real estate lawyer of the parties shall ensure that the net proceeds of sale are held in trust, and the parties notified, pending further orders.
h. The costs and expenses associated with the sale shall be borne equally by the parties, upon the provision of receipts, etc.
i. Either party may claim adjustments for repairs, improvements, and clean-up fees to be determined at trial.
j. Either party may make claims for expenses incurred post-separation to be dealt with at trial.
k. Each party shall be responsible for their own tax issues arising from the sale of the property.
l. Any further issues relating to the sale shall be dealt with by the trial judge or the parties can request to return before Justice Labrosse to deal with issues that are in dispute arising from the sale process.
14The parties are encouraged to resolve the costs of these motions. However, if either party seeks an order for costs of the motions, they may provide written submissions on costs within 15 days and the other party will have 15 days to respond. Written costs submissions shall be a maximum of three pages, plus attachments.
Justice Marc R. Labrosse
Date: May 6, 2026
CITATION: Markaroglu v. Looby, 2026 ONSC 2711
COURT FILE NO.: FC-24-405
DATE: 2026/05/06
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
RE: Shawn Nicholas Garo Markaroglu, Applicant
AND
Leah Marie Looby, Respondent
BEFORE: Justice Marc R. Labrosse
COUNSEL: Mr. Markaroglu, Self-Represented Mr. John Allan, for the Respondent
ENDORSEMENT
Justice Marc R. Labrosse
Released: May 6, 2026