In a family property appeal concerning equalization of a vested defined benefit pension, the Supreme Court addressed whether the pension should be valued using the termination value-added method or the termination pro rata method under Ontario’s Family Law Act.
The majority held that the Act does not mandate the value-added method and that, absent special circumstances, the pro rata method more equitably reflects the nature of a defined benefit pension, particularly where there is substantial pre-marital pensionable service.
The court upheld the trial judge’s assumed retirement date, refused to make “if and when” pension payments the default settlement mechanism, and left spousal support undisturbed.
The appeal was allowed only on pension valuation method and costs, and the matter was remanded for recalculation of the equalization payment.
