7,367
edits
Difference between revisions of "Dividing Property and Debt in Family Law Matters"
From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Dividing Property and Debt in Family Law Matters (view source)
Revision as of 20:20, 9 June 2016
, 20:20, 9 June 2016→Dividing property and debt unequally
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
Nate Russell (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 284: | Line 284: | ||
====Dividing property and debt unequally==== | ====Dividing property and debt unequally==== | ||
Under s. 95(1) of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may divide family property or family debt unequally, but | Under s. 95(1) of the ''[[Family Law Act]]'', the court may divide family property or family debt unequally, but only if equal division would be "significantly unfair"in the context of the factors mentioned in s. 95(2). Recent court decisions explain that the unfairness must be "weighty, meaningful or compelling." A judge can only order an unequal division of family property where the result of equal division would be so unfair as to be unjust or unreasonable. <!-- Note that significant unfairness in this context requires much more than differing financial contributions in a relationship. --> | ||
Section 95(2) provides a list of factors | Section 95(2) provides a list of factors considered when deciding if equal division of property and debt is significantly unfair: | ||
<blockquote><tt>(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the Supreme Court may consider one or more of the following:</tt></blockquote> | <blockquote><tt>(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the Supreme Court may consider one or more of the following:</tt></blockquote> | ||
| Line 301: | Line 301: | ||
<blockquote><blockquote><tt>(i) any other factor, other than the consideration referred to in subsection (3), that may lead to significant unfairness.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | <blockquote><blockquote><tt>(i) any other factor, other than the consideration referred to in subsection (3), that may lead to significant unfairness.</tt></blockquote></blockquote> | ||
In some cases judges find that the ''unequal contribution'' of one person, along with other factors, warrants unequal division. In other cases, ''unequal contribution'' | In some cases judges find that the ''unequal contribution'' of one person, along with other factors, warrants unequal division. In other cases, ''unequal contribution'' is not enough to establish "significant unfairness." | ||
Under s. 95(3), the court can also take into <span class="noglossary">account</span> issues relating to spousal support in deciding whether to divide family property and family debt unequally: | Under s. 95(3), the court can also take into <span class="noglossary">account</span> issues relating to spousal support in deciding whether to divide family property and family debt unequally: | ||
