Vayia Ellsworth

This ruling addresses costs arising from two related motions in a family law proceeding: a main motion for partition and sale of properties, and an urgent enforcement motion.

The applicant wife, Susan, was largely successful in both motions, securing orders for the sale of all four properties and the enforcement of a third-party purchase.

The respondent husband, William, resisted the sales and sought to purchase one property himself under complex terms.

The court found Susan's conduct reasonable and her success complete, having achieved a better outcome than her settlement offer.

While Susan sought full recovery, the court discounted her claimed hours for the main motion by 25% due to insufficient detail in her Bill of Costs and excluded time spent on negotiations for the enforcement motion, ultimately awarding her $58,308.00 in total costs.

The applicant wife brought a motion for the partition and sale of four rural properties, including a farm and a woodlot, owned by the parties during their 25-year marriage.

The respondent husband opposed the sale of the farm and woodlot, arguing they were "farms" under the Family Law Act and thus protected from sale under section 11 prior to a final equalization determination.

The court found that while the farm was a "farm" and the woodlot was a "business" under the Act, section 11 does not operate as a complete bar to partition and sale.

Balancing the applicant's prima facie right to partition against the likelihood of section 9 remedies, the court ordered both properties listed for sale immediately, noting the farm's lack of profitability and the applicant's right to realize the highest market value.