- What happens if the Parties sign Minutes of Settlement or Separation Agreement or have a Court Order issued based upon disclosure/documents provided, and then it is discovered that the information in said documents was incorrect? Does a Court have the jurisdiction to change the Agreement or previous Court Order?
The Court in Stephens v. Stephens (2016 ONSC 367) found that it has jurisdiction under Rule 25(19)(b) of the Family Law Rules to change an Order that contains a mistake. In this case, the Parties signed Minutes of Settlement based on agreed numbers, including the husband's pension. Two years later, the pension plan administrator advised the Parties that the value they provided was wrong and the husband's pension was actually worth more, and the wife was entitled to $82,003 more in equalization.
The Judge referred to Henderon v. Henderson (2015 ONSC 2914) in determining whether Rule 25(19)(b) could be used to rectify an Order. Justice Raikes looked at whether the original Order reflected the common intenion of the Parties and what grounds could be used to rectify the Order.
- What is a family gift and how do you prove it?
In the case Barber v. Magee (2015 ONSC 8054), the father provided money to his adult married son, which son used to pay down the mortgage on the matrimonial home. The court decided whether this would be considered a gift or a loan.
- If you have won a cost award against the other side, but they have filed for bankruptcy, can you do anything about it?
In the case of G.(W.) v. G.(K.) (2015 ONSC 6160), a 4 day Trial for spousal and child support was won by the wife on the issues plus costs in the amount of $54,700. The husband immediately filed for bankruptcy after getting the costs order.
Bankruptcy may protect the payor from equalization, but it will not protect them from support obligations.
- If you have won a cost award, but the other side has not paid up and is continuing to litigate against you, can you do anything about it?
In the case Izyuk v. Bilousou (2015 ONSC 3684), the husband got full custody of the children, but the wife kept bringing Motions. The husband asked for security of costs successfully because there was clear evidence of the wife's outrageous behaviour.