UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Divisible assets in common law Canada Hand, Mary 1983

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1983_A6_4 H36.pdf [ 14.3MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0077689.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0077689-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0077689-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0077689-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0077689-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0077689-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0077689-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0077689-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0077689.ris

Full Text

D i v i s i b l e A s s e t s i n Common Law Canada by MARY HAND B.A.(Mod), D.U. , 1 9 8 0 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF LAWS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1 9 8 3 Mary B r i g i d Hand, 1 9 8 3 I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agr e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e head o f my department o r by h i s o r h e r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f \ _ c u ^ The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date b a ^ ' A Xlfh >E-6 (2/79) - i i -Abs t r a c t , One o f t h e most c o n t e n t i o u s i s s u e s w i t h i n t h e a r e a o f r e c e n t m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y - l e g i s l a t i o n i n C a n a d i a n common law p r o v i n c e s c o n c e r n s ' w h a t p a r t o f a s p o u s e ' s p r o p e r t y i s p r i m a f a c i e d i s t r i b u t a b l e between b o t h s p o u s e s on m a r r i a g e breakdown. Each p r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e d e a l i n g w i t h t h i s i s s u e c o n t a i n s i t s own d e f i n i t i o n o f what i s o r i s n o t a d i v i s i b l e asset"'" and i n e v e r y p r o v i n c e t h a t d e f i n i t i o n has been the s u b j e c t o f j u d i c i a l s c r u t i n y . T h i s s t u d y w i l l a s s e s s and compare t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f " d i v i s i b l e a s s e t " employed by each p r o v i n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e g a r d t o how t h a t d e f i n i t i o n has been i n t e r p r e t e d by. t h e j u d i c i a r y . The t h e s i s i s p r e f a c e d by an i n t r o d u c t i o n , which b r i e f l y o u t l i n e s t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y . C h a p t e r s 1 t o 9 d e a l w i t h the l e g i s l a t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l p r o v i n c e s • The f i n a l s e c t i o n o f the t h e s i s c o n t a i n s t h e g e n e r a l o b s e r v a t i o n s and recommendations o f t h e w r i t e r . The s t u d y i s b a s e d on m a t e r i a l a v a i l a b l e up t o September 1982. E f f o r t s have been made t o g i v e t h e c o r r e c t p o s i t i o n i n each p r o v i n c e . as o f t h a t d a t e . Where p o s s i b l e , changes w h i c h o c c u r r e d s i n c e t h e w r i t i n g o f t h e f i r s t d r a f t have been i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e t e x t o f - i i i -t h e t h e s i s . Iri o t h e r i n s t a n c e s , such changes have been f o o t n o t e d . - i v-F o o t n o t e s t o A b s t r a c t 1. T h i s t e r m i n o l o g y i s used f o r c o n v e n i e n c e o n l y i n t h i s p a r t . The t e r m i n o l o g y o f t h e l e g i s l a t i o n i s n o t u n i f o r m and w i l l be r e f e r r e d to where a p p r o p r i a t e . - V -CONTENTS' A b s t r a c t ^ I n t r o d u c t i o n ]_ C h a p t e r 1 A l b e r t a 5 C h a p t e r 2 B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . . 35 C h a p t e r 3 • ' , • < . • • - ' " ' " " • • ' • M a n i t o b a 92 C h a p t e r 4 Newfoundland 130 C h a p t e r 5 Nova S c o t i a 151 C h a p t e r 6 New B r u n s w i c k • 174 C h a p t e r 7 O n t a r i o - v i -C h a p t e r 8 P r i n c e Edward I s l a n d 236 C h a p t e r 9 Saskatchewan 255 C o n c l u s i o n _ 192 B i b l i o g r a p h y 304 - v i i -A c'k'no wledg em e n't I am v e r y g r a t e f u l t o P r o f e s s o r K e i t h F a r q u h a r f o r the h e l p and g u i d a n c e he gave me i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s . I would a l s o l i k e t o thank a l l the o t h e r p e o p l e who e n c o u r a g e d me i n t h i s e n d e a v o u r , my p a r e n t s f o r t h e i r c o n f i d e n c e and C o l i n f o r h i s p a t i e n t e x h o r t a t i o n s . - 1 -I n t r o d u c t i o n In r e c e n t y e a r s r a p i d d e v e l o p m e n t s have been made t h r o u g h o u t the common law p r o v i n c e s o f Canada i n t h e f i e l d o f m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y law. Each common law p r o v i n c e has i n t r o d u c e d l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h i s a r e a w h i c h r a d i c a l l y changed t h e p r e - e x i s t i n g system a d o p t e d under t h e common law. The major r e a s o n f o r t h e new l e g i s l a t i o n was t h a t common law and e q u i t a b l e p r i n c i p l e s had p r o v e n i n a d e q u a t e t o compensate t h e homemaker f o r h e r r o l e i n b u i l d i n g up f a m i l y o r m a t r i m o n i a l a s s e t s d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h e m a r r i a g e . Under the s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y regime i n e x i s t e n c e b e f o r e t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f r e f o r m , each spouse r e t a i n e d o w n e r s h i p o f p r o p e r t y he or she had a c q u i r e d b e f o r e m a r r i a g e . P r o p e r t y o b t a i n e d d u r i n g the c o u r s e o f th e m a r r i a g e u s u a l l y r e m a i n e d the p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e spouse who had a c q u i r e d i t by p u r c h a s e from h i s o r h e r e a r n i n g s o r s a v i n g s , by i n h e r i t a n c e or by g i f t . W h i l e e q u i t a b l e d o c t r i n e s had some b e a r i n g on t h e q u e s t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e g a r d t o t h e c o n c e p t o f t r u s t , t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f e q u i t y was o f t e n n o t t h o u g h t enough t o p r e v e n t u n f a i r n e s s i n many i n s t a n c e s ^ . The p u b l i c i t y a t t a c h e d t o d e c i s i o n s 2 such as Murdoch v Murdoch c e n t r e d p u b l i c a t t e n t i o n on t h e p l i g h t o f the homemaker who mi g h t f i n d h e r s e l f i n t h e s i t u a t i o n t h a t , a f t e r many y e a r s o f m a r r i a g e , she had no l e g a l e n t i t l e m e n t t o m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y which had been b u i l t up o v e r the y e a r s t h r o u g h the j o i n t e f f o r t s o f b o t h s p o u s e s . The aim o f the new l e g i s l a t i o n was t o e f f e c t a more e q u i t a b l e -2-d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y than would have been a c h i e v e d a t common law. In most p r o v i n c e s the l e g i s l a t i o n a t t e m p t e d t o e f f e c t t h i s g o a l by t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f a s y s t e m o f d e f e r r e d s h a r i n g c o u p l e d w i t h j u d i c i a l d i s c r e t i o n . Such a s y s t e m i n v o l v e s t h e r e t e n t i o n of s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y w h i l e t h e m a r r i a g e r e m a i n s o n g o i n g . Once the m a r r i a g e has b r o k e n down, each spouse i s p r i m a f a c i e e n t i t l e d t o o n e - h a l f o f c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d p r o p e r t y . Where an e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f such a s s e t s would be u n f a i r , t h e c o u r t i n i t s d i s c r e t i o n may v a r y t h e d i v i s i o n o r o r d e r a d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p r o p e r t y t h a t i s n o t s p e c i f i e d as p r i m a f a c i e d i v i s i b l e . C e n t r a l t o the whole scheme o f the new A c t s i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f what p r o p e r t y i s t o be s u b j e c t t o t h e i r r e g i m e . Each p r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e c o n t a i n s i t s own d e f i n i t i o n o f what a s s e t s are p r i m a f a c i e deemed to be d i v i s i b l e . In some s t a t u t e s t h e t e r m i s d e f i n e d so b r o a d l y as t o ap p e a r a t f i r s t i n s t a n c e t o encompass a l m o s t a l l t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e s p o u s e s . O t h e r p r o v i n c e s draw a d i s t i n c t i o n between a s s e t s i n which s p o u s e s ar e p r i m a f a c i e e n t i t l e d t o sh a r e and " b u s i n e s s a s s e t s " , t h e l a t t e r n ot g e n e r a l l y b e i n g a v a i l a b l e f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s t h e s i s i s t o examine each common law p r o v i n c e ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f what p r o p e r t y i s p r i m a f a c i e d i s t r i b u t a b l e , and to examine how t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f s u c h has been i n t e r p r e t e d by the c o u r t s . The l e g i s l a t i o n o f each o f t h e n i n e p r o v i n c e s has been d i s c u s s e d to t h i s end. Co m p a r i s o n s between t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e d i f f e r e n t s t a t u t e s and j u d i c i a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h e r e o f have been drawn where a p p r o p r i a t e . As the m a t r i m o n i a l home i s g e n e r a l l y t r e a t e d s p e c i f i c a l l y i n each p r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e , i t has been d i s c u s s e d s e p a r a t e l y at t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f each c h a p t e r . C e r t a i n m a t t e r s s u c h -3-as e x t r a - p r o v i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n and t h e q u e s t i o n o f t a x a t i o n a r e n o t d e a l t w i t h i n t h e t h e s i s . W h i l e t h e y have i m p o r t a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f a m i l y p r o p e r t y law, t h e y were f e l t t o be o u t s i d e t h e scope o f t h i s s t u d y . In t h e f i n a l c h a p t e r g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n s a r e drawn as t o the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e l e g i s l a t i o n i n i t s e x i s t i n g f o r m and s u g g e s t i o n s o f f e r e d as t o how t h e l e g i s l a t i o n may be i m p r o v e d . The q u e s t i o n o f what p r o p e r t y i s t o be i n c l u d e d i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m a t r i m o n i a l a s s e t s i s a q u e s t i o n o f p o l i c y w hich must u l t i m a t e l y be d e c i d e d i n d i v i d u a l l y by each o f t h e p r o v i n c e s . By h a v i n g r e g a r d t o the a p p r o a c h e s o f o t h e r p r o v i n c e s , however, ways may be d i s c o v e r e d t o c o r r e c t c o n f u s i o n w h i c h has e v o l v e d as a r e s u l t o f t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f e x i s t i n g d e f i n i t i o n s . F o o t n o t e s t o I n t r o d u c t i o n F o r a m o r e d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y r e g i m e t h a t a p p l i e d b e f o r e p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i v e r e f o r m , s e e B r o m l e y , F a m i l y L a w , 5 t h e d . ( 1 9 7 6 ) ; C u l l i t y , " P r o p e r t y R i g h t s D u r i n g t h e S u b s i s t e n c e o f M a r r i a g e " , i n M e n d e s d a C o s t a , e d . S t u d i e s i n C a n a d i a n F a m i l y L a w , ( 1 9 7 2 ) , v o l . 1 , p . 1 7 9 ; a n d D i c e y , L a w a n d O p i n i o n , 2 n d . e d . ( 1 9 1 9 ) , p p . 3 7 1 - 3 9 8 . [ 1 9 7 5 ] 1 S . C . R . 4 2 3 . -5-C h a p t e r 1 - A l b e r t a The f i r s t t e n t a t i v e s t e p s towards m a t r i m o n i a l law r e f o r m were t a k e n by t h e A l b e r t a L e g i s l a t u r e i n 1977. In t h a t y e a r , f o l l o w i n g t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f a r e p o r t o f t h e I n s t i t u t e o f Law R e s e a r c h and Reform"*", two b i l l s were i n t r o d u c e d i n t h e t h i r d s e s s i o n o f t h e 1 8 t h l e g i s l a t u r e . The b i l l s , e n t i t l e d r e s p e c t i v e l y "The M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t " and "The M a t r i m o n i a l Home P o s s e s s i o n A c t " , were g i v e n s e c o n d r e a d i n g and t h e n a l l o w e d t o d i e on the o r d e r p a p e r . In May o f 1978 the 2 L e g i s l a t u r e p a s s e d t h e p r e s e n t M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t . The A c t was a s s e n t e d t o on May 16, 1978, and came i n t o f o r c e on J a n u a r y 1, 1979. The M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t o f A l b e r t a i s d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e p a r t s o f w h i c h o n l y P a r t s 1 and 2 a r e r e l e v a n t to t h i s d i s c u s s i o n . P a r t 1 d e a l s w i t h t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y upon t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f one o f t h e s p o u s e s . P a r t 2 i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home. In e m b a r k i n g upon an e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h i s e n a c t m e n t , i t i s h e l p f u l t o b e a r i n mind t h e words o f McClung J . i n Kamuchik v 3 ' Kamuchik as t o h i s view o f t h e p h i l o s o p h y u n d e r l y i n g t h e A c t : The M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t was n o t d e s i g n e d t o be, nor i s i t , a v e h i c l e t o r e d i s t r i b u t e w e a l t h . What i t does r e p r e s e n t i s t h e s o c i a l n e c e s s i t y o f r e c o g n i s i n g and p r o t e c t i n g p e c u n i a r y r i g h t s i n m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y e m e r g i n g from n o n - p e c u n i a r y c o n t r i b u t i o n s which had been q u e s t i o n e d by t h e f o r m e r c a s e law. -6-The M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t Under t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t i t i s p r o v i d e d t h a t upon m a r r i a g e breakdown o t h e r t h a n t e r m i n a t i o n , by d e a t h a spouse may a p p l y t o t h e c o u r t f o r an o r d e r i n r e s p e c t o f the d i s p o s i t i o n o f a l m o s t a l l the p r o p e r t y owned by ,the s p o u s e s . The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y i s i n g e n e r a l s u b j e c t t o a p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l s h a r i n g , w h i c h p r e s u m p t i o n may be v a r i e d a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f a c o u r t h a v i n g r e g a r d 4 . t o a p r e s c r i b e d l i s t o f t h i r t e e n f a c t o r s . P r o p e r t y s u b j e c t t o t h e A c t G i v e n the t i t l e o f t h e A l b e r t a s t a t u t e i t i s p e r h a p s s u p r i s i n g t h a t the A c t g i v e s no c o m p r e h e n s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f the t e r m " m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y " . The c l o s e s t t h e A c t comes t o a d e f i n i t i o n i s i n t h e w o r d i n g o f s . 7 ( l ) , which p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e c o u r t i s empowered t o "make a d i s t r i b u t i o n between t h e s p o u s e s o f a l l t h e p r o p e r t y owned by b o t h s p o u s e s o r by each o f them". The l e g i s l a t i o n t h u s c l e a r l y eschewed any a t t e m p t t o s e g r e g a t e " f a m i l y a s s e t s " f r o m " n o n - f a m i l y a s s e t s " . What i s i m p o r t a n t i s n o t t h e ty p e o f a s s e t n o r t h e use o f i t by one o r b o t h p a r t i e s b u t t h e f a c t o f o w n e r s h i p . The f a c t o f o w n e r s h i p b r i n g s t h e a s s e t w i t h i n s . 7 ( l ) i r r e s p e c t i v e o f whether the a s s e t i s owned j o i n t l y , o r i n common, o r by one o f the p a r t i e s o n l y , or j o i n t l y o r i n common w i t h a t h i r d p a r t y . P r e s u m a b l y a l s o , p r o p e r t y i n w h i c h one spouse has a b e n e f i c i a l i n t e r e s t w ould be r e g a r d e d as f a l l i n g w i t h i n s . 7 ( l ) . Where p r o p e r t y i s h e l d by a spouse b u t i s h e l d i n t r u s t f o r a t h i r d p a r t y , t h a t p r o p e r t y w i l l n o t be i n c l u d e d i n a 5 d i s t r i b u t i o n under t h e A c t . T h i s was a f f i r m e d i n Dochuk v Dochuk , where r e a l p r o p e r t y p u r c h a s e d by the w i f e f o r h e r f a t h e r and r e g i s t e r e d i n h e r name b e c a u s e o f h i s m e n t a l d i s a b i l i t y , was h e l d t o be b e n e f i c a l l y owned by t h e f a t h e r and exempt from d i s t r i b u t i o n . The major a d v a n t a g e o f t h e A l b e r t a a p p r o a c h t o a d e f i n i t i o n o f d i v i s i b l e a s s e t s i s the absence o f any n e c e s s i t y t o d e f i n e t h e way i n w hich p r o p e r t y i s h e l d . The d e f i n i t i o n , however, i s n o t f r e e o f c o m p l e x i t i e s . Some, d i f f i c u l t i e s have a r i s e n f r o m th e f a c t t h a t n o t a l l m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y i s s u b j e c t t o d i s t r i b u t i o n i n q u i t e t h e same way. S u b s e q u e n t s u b s e c t i o n s o f s.7 i s o l a t e t h r e e . c a t e g o r i e s o f p r o p e r t y : (a) p r o p e r t y n o t exempt i n i t s e l f b u t i n r e s p e c t o f w h i c h a money v a l u e i s exempt from s h a r i n g ^ ; (b) g a i n s and a c q u i s i t i o n s w h i c h a r e s h a r e a b l e b u t w i t h o u t any 7 p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l i t y ; and 8 (c) p r o p e r t y which i s s h a r e a b l e e q u a l l y i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e c o u r t . In making d i s t r i b u t i o n s under s.7(3) or (4) t h e c o u r t must have r e g a r d t o t h e c r i t e r i a i t e m i z e d i n s.8. A.Exempt p r o p e r t y - s.7(2) S e c t i o n 7(2) o f t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t p r o v i d e s as f o l l o w s 7(2) I f the p r o p e r t y i s (a) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse by g i f t from a t h i r d p a r t y , (b) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse by i n h e r i t a n c e , (c) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse b e f o r e t h e m a r r i a g e , (d) an .award or s e t t l e m e n t , o f damages i n t o r t i n f a v o u r o f a s p o u s e , u n l e s s t h e award o r s e t t l e m e n t i s c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r a l o s s t o b o t h s p o u s e s , o r (e) t h e p r o c e e d s o f an i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y t h a t i s n o t i n s u r a n c e i n r e s p e c t o f p r o p e r t y , u n l e s s t h e p r o c e e d s a r e c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r a l o s s t o b o t h s p o u s e s , -8-the market v a l u e o f t h a t p r o p e r t y (f ) a t t h e time o f t h e m a r r i a g e , o r (g) ,' on t h e da t e on which the p r o p e r t y was a c q u i r e d by the s p o u s e , w h i c h e v e r i s l a t e r , i s exempted from a d i s t r i b u t i o n under t h i s s e c t i o n . T h i s s u b s e c t i o n s e e k s t o exempt from a d i s t r i b u t i o n the market v a l u e as o f t h e d a t e o f a c q u i s i t i o n o f s p e c i f i e d i t e m s o f p r o p e r t y owned by one spouse t o w h i c h the o t h e r spouse has n o t c o n t r i b u t e d d u r i n g m a r r i a g e . G i f t s from t h i r d p a r t i e s , i n h e r i t a n c e s , p r o p e r t y b r o u g h t i n t o the m a r r i a g e , t o r t r e c o v e r i e s o f a p e r s o n a l n a t u r e , and i n s u r a n c e p r o c e e d s w h i c h a r e n o t i n r e s p e c t o f p r o p e r t y and do not compensate f o r a l o s s t o b o t h s p o u s e s a r e a c c o r d i n g l y e x c l u d e d f r o m the A c t ' s p r o v i s i o n s i n some r e s p e c t . The s e c t i o n , however, has n o t been f o u n d as s i m p l e t o ' o p e r a t e as i t s p r o v i s i o n s m ight s u g g e s t . One d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h i s s u b s e c t i o n i s t h a t i t seems t o i g n o r e the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t e q u i t a b l e i n t e r e s t s may be a c q u i r e d i n p r o p e r t y p r i o r t o t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f l e g a l t i t l e t o such p r o p e r t y by g i f t o r i n h e r i t a n c e . An example o f such a s i t u a t i o n w o u l d be where m a r r i e d p e r s o n s expend money and l a b o u r on the m a i n t a i n e n c e and improvement o f p r o p e r t y on t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t i t w i l l e v e n t u a l l y be c o n v e y e d t o them. I f t h e p r o p e r t y i s t h e n c o n v e y e d t o one spouse o n l y , s.7(2) w i l l f a v o u r t h a t spouse w i t h an e x e m p t i o n o f the market v a l u e o f the p r o p e r t y when i t was a c q u i r e d t o t h e e x c l u s i o n o f t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . Such a 9 s i t u a t i o n a p p e a r s t o have a r i s e n i n Maz urenko v Mazurenko . In t h a t c a s e , a husband and w i f e had l i v e d and worked on a f a r m b e l o n g i n g t o t h e husband's p a r e n t s . The m a j o r i t y o f the p r o p e r t i e s c o m p r i s i n g t h e f a r m were e v e n t u a l l y t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e husband a l o n e , a l t h o u g h one -9-q u a r t e r - s e c t i o n w h i c h had been s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o m i s e d t o b o t h p a r t i e s i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e w i f e r e t u r n i n g t o l i v e w i t h th e h u s b and a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n f o r a number o f y e a r s was t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e s p o u s e s j o i n t l y . The c o u r t f o u n d t h a t t h e p a r t i e s had c o n t r i b u t e d e q u a l l y t o t h e r u n n i n g o f the farm. N e v e r t h e l e s s , the w i f e was h e l d e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e under s . 7 ( l ) o n l y i n t h a t p r o p e r t y w h i c h had been s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o m i s e d . The o t h e r two p r o p e r t i e s were g i f t s t o the husband and t h u s f e l l w i t h i n s.7 (2) . A c c o r d i n g l y t h e market v a l u e o f t h e s e p r o p e r t i e s as o f t h e d a t e o f t h e i r a c q u i s i t i o n was"; exempt from d i s t r i b u t i o n . The w i f e i n t h i s i n s t a n c e c o u l d p r o b a b l y have made an a p p l i c a t i o n under the o l d common law as i n t e r p r e t e d i n P e t k u s v B e c k e r ^ t o th e e f f e c t t h a t she was e n t i t l e d t o an e q u i t a b l e i n t e r e s t i n t h e l a n d . No such a p p l i c a t i o n was made h e r e , however. I t i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t t h e n e c e s s i t y o f g o i n g o u t s i d e t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e A c t i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e r r a f a i r and j u s t r e s u l t r e f l e c t s a s e r i o u s want on t h e p a r t o f t h e e n a c t m e n t . Mazurenko v Mazurenko a l s o i n d i c a t e d t h a t d i f f i c u l t y may be e n c o u n t e r e d i n d e t e r m i n i n g w hether a g i f t was i n t e n d e d by the donor t o be g i v e n t o one o r b o t h s p o u s e s . In Mazurenko i t was f o u n d on t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t o n l y one o f t h e p r o p e r t i e s was i n t e n d e d as a g i f t t o b o t h s p o u s e s and t h a t t h e o t h e r s were i n t e n d e d f o r t h e h u s b and a l o n e . T h i s d e c i s i o n was i n p a r t p r e m i s e d on the f a c t t h a t one o f t h e p r o p e r t i e s had been t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o t h e j o i n t names o f t h e p a r t i e s . Where such e v i d e n c e i s l a c k i n g t h e c o u r t s have shown t h e m s e l v e s w i l l i n g t o l o o k t o t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e donor. In Hudyma v H udyma^, f o r example, t h e c o u r t a c c e p t e d th e t e s t i m o n y of the w i f e ' s mother t h a t a #20,000 g i f t t o h e r d a u g h t e r was i n t e n d e d f o r t h e d a u g h t e r a l o n e and was n o t a g i f t t o b o t h s p o u s e s . L o g i c a l l y i t would seem t h a t i f i t can be shown - l o -t h a t a g i f t o r i n h e r i t a n c e was c o n f e r r e d w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n o f b e n e f i t t i n g b o t h s p o u s e s , t h e n i t s h o u l d q u a l i f y as p r o p e r t y b e n e f i c i a l l y owned 12 by each o f them. T h i s was t h e view t a k e n i n Swanson v Swans on , i n w h i c h a g i f t f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f a down-payment on t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home was t r e a t e d as a g i f t t o b o t h p a r t i e s . The e x c l u s i o n i n s . 7 ( 2 ) ( c ) o f p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse b e f o r e m a r r i a g e means t h a t c o n t r i b u t i o n s made d u r i n g a p e r i o d o f c o h a b i t a t i o n p r i o r t o • t h e m a r r i a g e l i e o u t s i d e t h e d i s c r e t i o n 13 g r a n t e d by t h e A c t . In K a r m i n i s k i v K a r m i n i s k i . , a f u r t h e r f l a w i n t h e w o r d i n g o f t h e s e c t i o n came t o l i g h t . In t h i s case- i t was t h e husband who had b r o u g h t an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n o f m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y . The c o u p l e had c o h a b i t e d f o r a p e r i o d o f e i g h t y e a r s b e f o r e m a r r i a g e i n 1 9 6 9 , d u r i n g w h i c h tim e t h e h u s b a n d t r a n s f e r r e d t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home t o t h e w i f e . I n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h e c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home was exempt from d i s t r i b u t i o n under s . 7 ( 2 ) ( c ) , as b e i n g p r o p e r t y owned by t h e w i f e b e f o r e m a r r i a g e . The husband c o u l d 14 not r e l y on s . 7 ( 3 ) ( d ) o f t h e A c t as the p r o p e r t y was n o t p r o p e r t y " a c q u i r e d by a spouse by g i f t from t h e o t h e r s p o u s e " . The p a r t i e s were n o t m a r r i e d t o each o t h e r a t t h e t i m e o f t h e t r a n s f e r . Even where p r o p e r t y has been g i v e n by one spouse t o t h e o t h e r d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e , s . 7 ( 2 ) (c) may o p e r a t e so as t o g i v e d o u b l e c o m p e n s a t i o n t o t h e donor s p o u s e . No s p e c i f i c c a s e s i n p o i n t have been r e p o r t e d as y e t , but an example w i l l i l l u s t r a t e . I f a h u s b a n d g i v e s h i s w i f e an e x p e n s i v e i t e m o f j e w e l l e r y which he owned a t t h e t i m e o f the m a r r i a g e , t h e n under s . 7 ( 2 ) ( c ) he may c l a i m an e x e m p t i o n i n r e s p e c t o f t h e market v a l u e o f t h e p r o p e r t y a t the time o f t h e m a r r i a g e . The -11-w i f e may be p e r m i t t e d t o r e t a i n t h e j e w e l l e r y b u t i t s v a l u e w i l l have been a c c r e d i t e d t o the husband. F u r t h e r , he may be e n t i t l e d t o a s h a r e i n t h e market v a l u e o f t h e p r o p e r t y by v i r t u e o f s.7(3) (d) . B. D i s t r i b u t a b l e p r o p e r t y - s.7(3) S e c t i o n 7(2) exempts o n l y t h e market v a l u e o f s p e c i f i e d p r o p e r t y as o f the d a t e o f a c q u i s i t i o n o r m a r r i a g e . The d i f f e r e n c e between the v a l u e a t t h a t d a t e and i t s v a l u e at t r i a l i s d e a l t w i t h , i n t e r a l i a , i n s . 7 ( 3 ) . S e c t i o n 7(3) p r o v i d e s : 7(3) The C o u r t s h a l l , a f t e r t a k i n g t h e m a t t e r s i n s.8 i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , d i s t r i b u t e t h e f o l l o w i n g i n such manner as i t c o n s i d e r s j u s t and e q u i t a b l e : (a) the d i f f e r e n c e between the exempted v a l u e o f p r o p e r t y d e s c r i b e d ' i n s u b s e c t i o n (2)- ( i n t h i s s u b s e c t i o n r e f e r r e d t o as t h e " o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y " ) and t h e market v a l u e a t the t i m e o f t r i a l o f t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y o r p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d ( i ) as a r e s u l t o f an exchange o f t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y , o r ( i i ) f r o m th e p r o c e e d s , w h e t h e r d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t , o f a d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y ; (b) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a s p o u s e w i t h income r e c e i v e d d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e from th e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y o r p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d i n a manner d e s c r i b e d i n c l a u s e (a) ( i ) o r ( i i ) ; (c) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse a f t e r a d e c r e e n i s i o f d i v o r c e , a d e c l a r a t i o n o f n u l l i t y o f m a r r i a g e o r a judgment of j u d i c i a l s e p a r a t i o n i s made i n r e s p e c t o f t h e s p o u s e s ; (d) p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse by g i f t from th e o t h e r s p o u s e . No p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l s h a r i n g a p p l i e s t o p r o p e r t y c o v e r e d by t h i s s u b s e c t i o n . Whether and i n what p r o p o r t i o n s u c h p r o p e r t y w i l l be d i s t r i b u t e d i s a m a t t e r f o r t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f the c o u r t , h a v i n g r e g a r d t o t h e c r i t e r i a i n s.8. S e c t i o n s 7 ( 3 ) ( a ) and (b) embrace g a i n s i n , p r o p e r t y s u b s t i t u t e d f o r , o r p r o c e e d s o f d i s p o s i t i o n o f exempt p r o p e r t y . In o r d e r t o f a l l w i t h i n t h i s c a t e g o r y i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o be a b l e t o t r a c e t h e i n c r e a s e -12-o r s u b s t i t u t e d p r o p e r t y from t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y . The c o u r t s have e m p h a s i s e d i n p a r t i c u l a r t h a t when a t t e m p t i n g t o t r a c e p r o p e r t y p u r c h a s e d w i t h t h e p r o c e e d s o f the o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y , a d i r e c t s u b s t i t u t i o n o f one f o r t h e o t h e r must be p r o v e n . Thus i n B a k e r v 15 B a k e r the husband had f i n a n c e d t h e p u r c h a s e o f c e r t a i n l a n d s by m o r t g a g i n g some exempt p r o p e r t y and c l a i m e d t h a t t h e new p r o p e r t i e s ought a l s o t o be r e g a r d e d as exempt. P u r v i s J . r e j e c t e d t h i s c o n t e n t i o n and h e l d t h a t m o r t g a g i n g t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y i n o r d e r t o p u r c h a s e f u r t h e r p r o p e r t i e s d i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e a " d i s p o s i t i o n " w i t h i n t h e meanin o f the l e g i s l a t i o n so as t o .make t h o s e f u r t h e r p r o p e r t i e s exempt. He f e l t t h a t the l a n g u a g e o f s.7(3) (a) ( i i ) i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t u r e i n t e n d e d t o a l l o w t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n o f newly a c q u i r e d p r o p e r t y when t h e r e was a d i r e c t exchange o r when t h e o r i g i n a l p r o p e r t y was s o l d and the p r o c e e d s u s e d t o buy new p r o p e r t y . M o r t g a g i n g d i d n o t come w i t h i n t h i s d e f i n i t i o n . W h i l e p r o p e r t y d e a l t w i t h i n s s . 7 (3) (a) and (b) i s n o t s u b j e c t t o a p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l s h a r i n g , s.7 seems f r a m e d i n su c h a way as t o s u g g e s t t h a t the non-owning spouse ought g e n e r a l l y t o be e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e i n some p a r t o f the i n c r e m e n t i n such p r o p e r t y . In Mazurenko v M a z u r e n k o ^ , t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e c o n t r a r y m ight be t h e c a s e . T h e J a p p r o a c h - o f t h e C o u r t can b e s t be summarised i n t h e 17 words o f S t e p h e n s o n J.A.: . . . S e c t i o n 7(3) e n v i s a g e s a t r a c i n g o f exempted p r o p e r t y . The t r a c e d p r o p e r t y i s t o be d i s t r i b u t e d i n a j u s t and e q u i t a b l manner, b u t t h e r e i s no p r e s u m p t i o n . The f a c t o r s w h i c h a r e t o be c o n s i d e r e d a r e the same, namely t h o s e c o n t a i n e d i n s.8. I t seems t o me t h a t a r e l e v a n t f a c t o r o r c i r c u m s t a n c e i n l o o k i n g a t t h e k i n d o f p r o p e r t y , l o o k i n g a t s.8(m), i s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e under w h i c h i t i s a c q u i r e d . . . . I am o f t h e view t h a t i n  l o o k i n g a t t h e i n c r e m e n t o r p r o c e e d s we must ask o u r s e l v e s  w h ether or- n o t t h e exempt p r o p e r t y was b r o u g h t i n t o t h e m a t r i m o n i a l r e g i m e ; d i d i t come i n t o be us e d f o r t h e m u t u a l -13-b e n e f i t and a c c o u n t ? (emphasis a d d e d ) . In a p p l y i n g t h i s t e s t , w h i c h the c o u r t c o n s i d e r e d p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r f a r m p r o p e r t y , the i n c r e m e n t on a p o r t i o n o f farm p r o p e r t y g i v e n t o the husband was e x c l u d e d as i t had n o t been " b r o u g h t i n t o t h e m a t r i m o n i a l r e g i m e " . In r e s p e c t o f c e r t a i n o f t h a t p r o p e r t y , however, the c r u c i a l f a c t o r was r e g a r d e d as b e i n g t h a t the p r o p e r t y had been g i v e n t o t h e h u s b a n d a f t e r t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e s p o u s e s , one o f the f a c t o r s a c o u r t i s e x p r e s s l y d i r e c t e d t o t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t under s . 8 ( f ) when making a d i s t r i b u t i o n under the A c t . The C o u r t o f A p p e a l gave no i n d i c a t i o n i n t h i s case as t o what might c o n s t i t u t e "mutual b e n e f i t and a c c o u n t " w i t h i n i t s d e f i n i t i o n , t h u s l e a v i n g s c o p e f o r u n c e r t a i n t y . Would i t be enough t h a t t h e p r o p e r t y was managed s e p a r a t e l y by one s p o u s e , even though the money from th e p r o p e r t y was s h a r e d ? What o f p r o p e r t y w h i c h was u s e d s o l e l y by one spouse as a hobby, o r was u s e d by the h u s b and and c h i l d r e n o f t h e m a r r i a g e , b u t n o t by the w i f e ? P e r h a p s the b i g g e s t c r i t i c i s m w hich can be l e v e l l e d a g a i n s t the C o u r t o f A p p e a l t e s t i s t h e f a c t t h a t such a t e s t i s nowhere m e n t i o n e d i n t h e scheme o f the A c t . S e c t i o n 7(3) g i v e s the c o u r t a f r e e hand t o c o n s i d e r t h e f a c t o r s i n s.8 w i t h o u t b e i n g bound by any p r e s u m p t i o n . I t does n o t seek t o impose any c r i t e r i a by w h i c h i n c r e m e n t s s h o u l d be d i s t r i b u t e d . In e f f e c t , t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l has d e c i d e d t h a t the s.7(3) c a t e g o r y can o n l y be d e a l t w i t h a d e q u a t e l y by the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f some b a s i s (the u s e r t e s t ) on w h i c h i n c r e m e n t s o f exempt p r o p e r t y w i l l be d i s t r i b u t e d . In the v a s t m a j o r i t y o f c a s e s , i n c r e m e n t s w i l l r e s u l t -14-from th e e f f e c t o f i n f l a t i o n on exempt p r o p e r t y . The q u e s t i o n t h u s a r i s e s as t o whether s u c h g a i n s s h o u l d be d i s t r i b u t e d a t a l l and i f s o , w h ether t h e y s h o u l d be d i s t r i b u t e d on a d i f f e r e n t b a s i s f r o m g e n e r a l p r o p e r t y as d i s t r i b u t e d under s . 7 ( 4 ) . The q u e s t i o n o f w hether i n f l a t i o n a r y g a i n s s h o u l d be d i s t r i b u t e d 18 was d i s c u s s e d by F o r s y t h J . i n H a s s e l l v Has se11 p r i o r t o t h e Mazurenko d e c i s i o n . In t h i s case i n c r e m e n t s due to i n f l a t i o n were d i s t r i b u t e d , b u t on an u n e q u a l b a s i s . In d e c i d i n g the i s s u e F o r s y t h J . r e f e r r e d t o the p h i l o s o p h y b e h i n d s i m i l a r l e g i s l a t i o n i n the U n i t e d 19 S t a t e s as i n t e r p r e t e d by a C a n a d i a n commentator . He a d o p t e d th e 20 f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e : A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e A m e r i c a n j u r i s p r u d e n c e w o u l d , on t h e whole, a p p e a r t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t where p r o p e r t y i s exempt from d i s t r i b u t i o n any i n c r e a s e i n v a l u e due e n t i r e l y t o the n a t u r e o f t h e p r o p e r t y i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s n o t r e q u i r i n g t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e p a r t i e s s h o u l d a l s o r e m a i n exempt. Where, however, the i n c r e a s e i n v a l u e or the p r o f i t r e s u l t i n g from th e p r o p e r t y a r e due i n p a r t t o t h e e f f o r t s o f t h e f a m i l y u n i t , i t i s n o t u n r e a s o n a b l e t h a t the i n c r e a s e i n v a l u e d i r e c t l y , a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e f a m i l y e f f o r t s be c o u n t e d among the b e n e f i t s a v a i l a b l e f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e e v e n t o f m a r r i a g e breakdown. In t h i s i n s t a n c e t h e h u s b a n d had u s e d th e exempt p r o p e r t y (a house) as p a r t o f h i s r e s i d e n t i a l p r o p e r t y a f t e r he m a r r i e d inasmuch as he a l l o w e d h i s mother t o r e s i d e t h e r e and c h a r g e d o n l y a m i n i m a l r e n t . The c o u r t f o u n d t h a t the husband's d e s i r e t o m i n i m i z e debt l o a d and pay o f f a l l d e b t s o u t s t a n d i n g r e s u l t e d i n a v e r y s p a r t a n l i f e f o r h i s w i f e and c h i l d r e n d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f the m a r r i a g e , as r e v e n u e w h i c h might o t h e r w i s e have come i n t o the h o u s e h o l d by way o f r e a l i z a t i o n o f a p p r o p r i a t e r e n t a l s on the p r o p e r t y was s a c r i f i c e d i n f a v o u r o f cheap a c c o m o d a t i o n f o r t h e mother. I t was i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t t h e w i f e was h e l d e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e i n i n f l a t i o n a r y g a i n s i n t h e exempt -15-p r o p e r t y . In d i s c u s s i n g t h e s h a r e t o w h i c h the w i f e was e n t i t l e d under 21 s . 7 ( 3 ) , F o r s y t h J . n o t e d : The s t a t u t e i n my. o p i n i o n c o n t e m p l a t e s , i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h i s n a t u r e , a r b i t r a r y d e c i s i o n s b e i n g made. I say " a r b i t r a r y " n o t i n t h e sense o f w i t h o u t j u s t i f i c a t i o n o r r e a s o n , b u t " a r b i t r a r y " on t h e b a s i s t h a t no p r e c i s e c a l c u l a t i o n o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f what i s a p p r o p r i a t e can n e c e s s a r i l y be made. I t i s c l e a r l y a m a t t e r o f judgment. F o r s y t h J . ' s d e c i s i o n seems t o have a n t i c i p a t e d t h e judgment of the C o u r t o f A p p e a l i n Mazurenko and i t a p p e a r s l i k e l y t h a t t h e " u s e r t e s t " w i l l be a p p l i e d i n f u t u r e c a s e s d e a l i n g w i t h s . 7 ( 3 ) . The 2 2 t e s t was e x p r e s s l y a p p r o v e d i n M i l l h a e m v M i l l h a e m . S t r a t t o n J . f o u n d t h a t t h e exempt p r o p e r t y g i v i n g r i s e t o the i n c r e m e n t a l p r o p e r t y c l a i m e d under s.7(3) i n t h i s i n s t a n c e had c l e a r l y been b r o u g h t i n t o the m a t r i m o n i a l r e g i m e . I t was used f o r t h e r a n c h o p e r a t i o n s , f o r t h e mu t u a l b e n e f i t and adv a n t a g e o f b o t h p a r t i e s t o t h e same e x t e n t as t h e o t h e r l a n d s c o m p r i s i n g t h e i n t e g r a t e d r a n c h u n i t . I t r e m a i n s t o be seen what l i m i t s t h e c o u r t w i l l s e t t o t h e t e s t i n f u t u r e c a s e s and how f a r the c o n c e p t o f "mutual b e n e f i t and a c c o u n t " w i l l be e x t e n d e d . C. D i v i s i b l e p r o p e r t y - s.7'H) S e c t i o n 7(4) c o v e r s p r o p e r t y d e f i n e d i n s u b s e c t i o n XI) .and:not d e a l t w i t h i n s u b s e c t i o n s (2) o r ( 3 ) . The s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s : 7(4) I f t h e p r o p e r t y b e i n g d i s t r i b u t e d i s p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e and i s n o t p r o p e r t y r e f e r r e d t o i n s u b s e c t i o n s (2) and ( 3 ) , t h e C o u r t s h a l l d i s t r i b u t e the p r o p e r t y e q u a l l y between the s p o u s e s u n l e s s i t a p p e a r s t o t h e C o u r t t h a t i t wo u l d n o t be j u s t and e q u i t a b l e t o do s o , t a k i n g i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e m a t t e r s i n . s.8. - 1 6 -Th i s s u b s e c t i o n i s f r a m e d i n s i m p l e terms and has n o t p r e s e n t e d t h e c o u r t s w i t h many d i f f i c u l t i e s i n i t s t h i s i s t h e case o f p e n s i o n s . In G o e t j en t o i n c l u d e i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n a p e n s i o n owned by t h e h u s b and which was 24 not y e t p a y a b l e . He n o t e d : The d e f e n d a n t w i l l be e n t i t l e d t o a p e n s i o n o f #833 p e r month on r e t i r e m e n t from the C a l g a r y p o l i c e f o r c e . No p r e s e n t c a l c u l a t i o n s were made w i t h r e s p e c t t o same; the d e f e n d a n t has r e m a r r i e d and w i l l be r e q u i r e d t o c o n t i n u e t o make such payments as a r e due under the d e c r e e n i s i as v a r i e d , and under t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s I am t r e a t i n g t h e e x p e c t a t i o n o f p e n s i o n moneys o n l y as a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n i n terms o f r e a c h i n g a d e c i s i o n on f i n a n c i a l m a t t e r s g e n e r a l l y . w hich a p e n s i o n t h i s c a s e S i n c l a i r C.J.Q.B. c l e a r l y seemed t o r e g a r d t h e husband's f u t u r e p e n s i o n r i g h t s as an i t e m o f d i v i s i b l e p r o p e r t y , as he s p e c i f i c a l l y r e j e c t e d a c o n t e n t i o n by t h e husband t h a t the p e n s i o n was a g i f t from the husband's mother and t h e r e f o r e was exempt under s . 7 ( 2 ) . The r e p o r t e d judgment, however, g i v e s no i n d i c a t i o n as t o how the p e n s i o n was u l t i m a t e l y d i v i d e d , as no r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p e n s i o n i s r e p o r t e d i n S i n c l a i r C.J.Q.B.'s c o n c l u s i o n s . I t i s u n c l e a r w hether D i x o n J . ' s d e c i s i o n on p e n s i o n s w i l l be f o l l o w e d i n f u t u r e c a s e s . He gave no l e g a l r e a s o n f o r h i s d e c i s i o n n o t t o i n c l u d e t h e p e n s i o n i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n . The d e f i n i t i o n o f p r o p e r t y c o n t a i n e d i n s.7 c e r t a i n l y seems wide enough t o i n c l u d e such an a s s e t . I f i t were t h o u g h t u n f a i r t o i n c l u d e i t i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n t h e c o u r t c o u l d e x e r c i s e i t s d i s c r e t i o n under s.8 i n o r d e r t o v e s t i t s o l e l y i n t h e owner. a p p l i c a t i o n . An e x c e p t i o n t o 2 3 v G o e t j en , D i x o n J . r e f u s e d The o n l y r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n s i n c e t h i s c ase i n 2 5 has been m e n t i o n e d a p p e a r s to be Lucas v L u cas . In -17-V a l u a t i on V a l u a t i o n under the A c t i s i m p o r t a n t i n two r e s p e c t s . F i r s t , t h e e x e m p t i o n i n s.7 (2) c o v e r s o n l y t h e market v a l u e o f p r o p e r t y a t the date o f m a r r i a g e o r t h e da t e o f a c q u i s i t i o n , w h i c h e v e r i s the l a t e r . T h i s same v a l u a t i o n i s n e c e s s a r y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t o f p r o p e r t y s u b j e c t t o u n e q u a l s h a r i n g under s s . 7 (3) (a) and (b) , t h a t i s , t h e d i f f e r e n c e between the e a r l i e r v a l u a t i o n o f the o r i g i n a l (exempted) p r o p e r t y and i t s v a l u e a t t h e time o f t r i a l . P r a c t i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s w i l l o b v i o u s l y a t t e n d t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f b a c k - d a t e d v a l u e s . In p r a c t i c e t h e c o u r t s have t o r e l y on t h e e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s o f one s i d e o r the o t h e r f o r t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . The s e c o n d a r e a i n w h i c h t h e i s s u e o f v a l u a t i o n a r i s e s i n v o l v e s t h e q u e s t i o n as t o t h e time f o r v a l u a t i o n o f p r o p e r t y c a u g h t by t h e r e m a i n i n g p a r a g r a p h s o f s.7(3) and/or p r o p e r t y encompassed by s . 7 ( 4 ) . The o b v i o u s a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e the da t e o f t r i a l o r t h e da t e o f s e p a r a t i o n . The f i r s t w ould appear t o be the more l o g i c a l c h o i c e s i n c e i t i s a t t h e da t e o f t r i a l t h a t the v a l u e s a r e e a s i e s t t o a s s e s s . I n d e e d s . 8 ( f ) , w h i c h l i s t s as one o f t h e m a t t e r s t o be c o n s i d e r e d i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n t h e q u e s t i o n o f whether p r o p e r t y was a c q u i r e d when t h e spo u s e s were l i v i n g s e p a r a t e and a p a r t , s u p p o r t s t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 26 In Groe nwe g v Groe nwe g , however, Q u i g l e y J . v a l u e d t h e p r o p e r t y as o f the d a t e o f s e p a r a t i o n , b e i n g o f ' o p i n i o n t h a t t h e r e was n o t h i n g i n the A c t w h i c h made i t o b l i g a t o r y t o v a l u e a s s e t s a t any p a r t i c u l a r date and t h a t c o m p l e t e d i s c r e t i o n was l e f t w i t h t h e c o u r t i n t h i s r e g a r d . T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n has been c r i t i c i z e d by P r o f e s s o r McLeod as i n t r o d u c i n g u n n e c e s s a r y u n c e r t a i n t y i n t o the d i v i s i o n o f m a r i t a l a s s e t s by means -18-27 o f t h e v a l u a t i o n date . He p o i n t s o u t t h a t a l o o s e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e v a l u a t i o n d a t e c o u l d l e a d t o more l i t i g a t i o n as i t w o u l d d i s c o u r a g e p a r t i e s from d i v i d i n g a s s e t s when t h a t d i v i s i o n t u r n s on t h e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e d i v i s i b l e a s s e t s . In c o n t r a s t t o Groenweg, s u b s e q u e n t c a s e s have i n v a r i a b l y c h o s e n the date o f t r i a l as t h e d a t e o f v a l u a t i o n . In 28 Mazurenko v Mazurenko , S t e p h e n s o n J.A. e x p r e s s e d as a g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e t h a t v a l u a t i o n s h o u l d be a s s e s s e d a t t r i a l , a l t h o u g h he e m p h a s i s e d t h a t h i s s t a t e m e n t was n o t c o n c l u s i v e on t h i s p o i n t . In 29 G o e t j e n v G o e t ] e n , D i x o n J . a l s o chose the d a t e o f t r i a l as t h e d a t e o f v a l u a t i o n , r e g a r d i n g Mazurenko as e x p r e s s a u t h o r i t y f o r t h i s c h o i c e : 3 0 I t i s c l e a r from the judgment o f S t e p h e n s o n J.A. i n Mazurenko v Mazurenko.... t h a t t h e t i m e f o r v a l u a t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y s h o u l d be t h a t o f t h e d a t e o f t r i a l and n o t t h e time o f s e p a r a t i o n . In t h e l i g h t o f t h e s e d e c i s i o n s , t h e d e c i s i o n - " as t o v a l u a t i o n i n Groe nwe g v Groenwe g l o s e s much o f i t s i m p a c t . The f a c t s o f the c a s e , i n d e e d , p r o b a b l y i n f l u e n c e d t h e d e c i s i o n t o a l a r g e e x t e n t . Q u i g l e y J . was s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e r e had been no economic c o - o p e r a t i o n between the s p o u s e s s i n c e the d a t e o f s e p a r a t i o n and t h a t no p r e - s e p a r a t i o n a c t i v i t y s u b s t a n t i a l l y a f f e c t e d t h e v a l u e s u b s e q u e n t t o s e p a r a t i o n . I t was i n t h i s l i g h t t h a t he o r d e r e d an e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f a l l a s s e t s v a l u e d as o f t h e date o f s e p a r a t i o n . Even i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , i t seems t h a t the a p p r o a c h o f t h e A l b e r t a C o u r t o f A p p e a l w o u l d have been 31 t o v a l u e t h e p r o p e r t y as o f t h e d a t e o f t r i a l . I n S t e w a r t v S t e w a r t i t was s u g g e s t e d t h a t the p r o p e r c o u r s e i n such a case would be t o v a l u e t h e m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y as o f t h e d a t e o f t r i a l and t h e n award an u n e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y . I t seems, a c c o r d i n g l y , t h a t t h e d a t e o f v a l u a t i o n i n A l b e r t a d e c i s i o n s w i l l be t h a t o f the d a t e o f t r i a l i n most, i f n o t a l l , c i r c u m s t a n c e s . -19-P o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s S e c t i o n 7(1) g i v e s the c o u r t power t o "make a d i s t r i b u t i o n between the s p o u s e s o f a l l t h e p r o p e r t y owned by b o t h s p o u s e s and by each o f them". T h e o r e t i c a l l y , t h e r e f o r e , p r o p e r t y • o b t a i n e d by e i t h e r spouse a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n w i l l be s u b j e c t t o d i s t r i b u t i o n under t h e A c t u n l e s s t h a t p r o p e r t y f a l l s w i t h i n one o f t h e e x e m p t i o n s m e n t i o n e d i n s.7(2) . In p r a c t i c e , however, i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t a c o u r t would o r d e r an e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f such p r o p e r t y , a t l e a s t where the non-owning spouse has made no c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e a c q u i s i t i o n , Two d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f p r o p e r t y may f a l l under t h i s h ead: (a) I n c r e a s e s i n t h e v a l u e o f e x i s t i n g m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y a f t e r t h e spo u s e s have s e p a r a t e d ; (b) New p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d s i n c e s e p a r a t i o n . (a) I n c r e a s e d v a l u e o f p r e - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s I t has a l r e a d y been n o t e d t h a t t h e c o u r t s i n g e n e r a l w i l l c hoose the date o f t r i a l as the da t e a t which a s s e t s ought t o be 32 v a l u e d . I n Mazurenko v Mazurenko , S t e p h e n s o n J.A. s u g g e s t e d t h a t a non-owning s p o u s e s h o u l d s h a r e e q u a l l y w i t h t h e owning spouse i n any i n c r e a s e i n the v a l u e o f p r o p e r t y between the time o f s e p a r a t i o n and the time o f t r i a l where t h a t i n c r e a s e was due l a r g e l y o r s o l e l y to i n f l a t i o n . Where the i n c r e a s e was due t o the e f f o r t s o f one spouse o n l y , however, he r e c o g n i s e d t h a t a d e p a r t u r e from t h e u s u a l e q u a l 3 3 d i v i s i o n o f p r o p e r t y m ight be a p p r o p r i a t e . He e x p l a i n e d : The C o u r t must, i n my vie w , l o o k a t the r e l e v a n t f a c t s under s.8 and t h e n ask i t s e l f i f i t would be u n j u s t o r i n e q u i t a b l e -20-t o d i v i d e the p r o p e r t y e q u a l l y . T h a t c o n c l u s i o n would n o t be l i g h t l y r e a c h e d . T h e r e must be some r e a l i m b a l a n c e i n t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n h a v i n g r e g a r d to what was e x p e c t e d o f each o r a t t r i b u t a b l e t o t h e o t h e r f a c t o r s i n s.8. I n . e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e p r e s u m p t i o n I t a k e t h e l e g i s l a t u r e t o have d e c i d e d t h a t i n o r d i n a r y c a s e s e q u a l i t y i s t h e r u l e . T h i s r e a s o n i n g i m p l i e s t h a t the onus w i l l be on t h e p a r t y a s s e r t i n g t h a t t h e r e s h o u l d be an u n e q u a l d i v i s i o n t o p r o v e t h a t an e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n would be u n f a i r . What p r e c i s e d e g r e e o f p r o o f i s 3 4 r e q u i r e d i s not c e r t a i n . I n S t e w a r t v S t e w a r t the husband p r o v e d t h a t from 1978 ( t h e d a t e o f s e p a r a t i o n o f the s p o u s e s ) t o September 1981 ( t h e d a t e o f t r i a l ) , he a l o n e had c o n t r i b u t e d t o a 50% i n c r e a s e i n the n e t w orth o f a f a m i l y b u s i n e s s . I n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l a f f i r m e d t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e t r i a l j u d g e who had o r d e r e d an u n e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f t h e b u s i n e s s a s s e t s . The husband's c o n t r i b u t i o n i n S t e w a r t was p a r t i c u l a r l y o b v i o u s . I t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t i t i s t h i s t y p e o f s t r o n g e v i d e n c e t h a t w i l l be r e q u i r e d by t h e c o u r t s b e f o r e t h e y w i l l be p r e p a r e d t o make an u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n i n c r e a s e s i n v a l u e under s.7(4) . (b) New p r o p e r t y New p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n w i l l n o t n e c e s s a r i l y be d i s t r i b u t e d e q u a l l y between the s p o u s e s a t t r i a l . Where the p r o p e r t y has been a c q u i r e d a f t e r a d e c r e e n i s i o f d i v o r c e , a d e c l a r a t i o n o f n u l l i t y o f m a r r i a g e or a judgment o f j u d i c i a l s e p a r a t i o n , t h e c o u r t , a f t e r t a k i n g t h e m a t t e r s i n s.8 i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , can d i s t r i b u t e 35 such p r o p e r t y xn a manner i t c o n s i d e r s j u s t and e q u i t a b l e . T h e r e i s no p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l s h a r i n g i n such a case . The d i v i s i o n t o be made i s i n the d i s c r e t i o n o f the c o u r t . Where p r o p e r t y i s a c q u i r e d -21-a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n b u t b e f o r e a d e c r e e n i s i e t c . has been o b t a i n e d , t h e p r o p e r t y i s s h a r e a b l e under s.7 (4) , t o w h i c h a p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l 36 s h a r i n g a p p l i e s . Even i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , t h e c o u r t i s e n t i t l e d t o make an u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n . S e c t i o n 8 ( f ) s p e c i f i c a l l y m e n t i o n s t h a t t h e c o u r t s h o u l d have r e g a r d to "whether t h e p r o p e r t y was a c q u i r e d when the s p o u s e s were l i v i n g s e p a r a t e and a p a r t " i n making a d i s t r i b u t i o n under the A c t . T h e r e a p p e a r t o have been no r e p o r t e d i n s t a n c e s t o d a t e i n w hich the i s s u e o f p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p r o p e r t y has a r i s e n f o r d i s c u s s i o n . I t seems l i k e l y , however, t h a t where p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p r o p e r t y has been a c q u i r e d s o l e l y t h r o u g h the e f f o r t s o f one s p o u s e , w i t h moneys a c q u i r e d s i n c e s e p a r a t i o n , a c o u r t would n o t i n c l u d e t h a t p r o p e r t y i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n u nder t h e A c t . Where the p r o p e r t y had been a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h t h e use o f p r e - s e p a r a t i o n m a r i t a l a s s e t s , the s i t u a t i o n would be d i f f e r e n t . S e c t i o n 8(c) m e n t i o n s as a n o t h e r f a c t o r t o be t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n , "the c o n t r i b u t i o n , w h e t h e r f i n a n c i a l o r i n some o t h e r form, made d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y by or on b e h a l f o f a spouse to the a c q u i s i t i o n , c o n s e r v a t i o n or improvement o f p r o p e r t y " . I f p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s were a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h t h e use o f p r e - s e p a r a t i o n m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y , i t i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t s . 8 ( c ) would have a b e a r i n g on the q u e s t i o n o f t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n . In t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h e r e would be no n e c e s s i t y t o t r a c e t h e m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y i n t o t h e new a s s e t s . The f a c t o f d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the new a c q u i s i t i o n s ' would be s u f f i c i e n t t o e s t a b l i s h a p r i m a f a c i e r i g h t t o a s h a r e i n them. The p r o v i s i o n s o f s . 8 ( c ) a f f o r d p r o t e c t i o n to--.a non-owning spouse i n the e v e n t t h a t p r e - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s are d i s p o s e d o f by t h e owner-spouse a f t e r ' s e p a r a t i o n b u t p r i o r t o t r i a l and new a s s e t s a c q u i r e d i n t h e i r s t e a d . What o f t h e s i t u a t i o n where p r e - s e p a r a t i o n -22-p r o p e r t y has been s o l d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n and t h e p r o c e e d s "spent by*- t h e t r i a l d a t e ? I t seems t h a t i n such a case t h e non-owning spouse would have the o p t i o n o f r e l y i n g on s . 8 ( l ) , the f a c t t h a t a spouse has d i s s i p a t e d p r o p e r t y to"! the 1.detriment o f the o t h e r s p o u s e , i n o r d e r t o c l a i m an u n e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f t h e r e m a i n i n g a s s e t s . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , a p p l i c a t i o n may be made under s.10 o f the A c t . T h i s s e c t i o n a l l o w s t h e c o u r t to i n c l u d e as p a r t o f t h e v a l u e o f t h e m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y , o r even t o r e c a p t u r e , p r o p e r t y t h a t has been g i v e n o r t r a n s f e r r e d f o r l e s s t h a n s u f f i c i e n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n , w i t h a view t o d e f e a t i n g a c l a i m u n der t h e A c t . I t i s a p p a r e n t , however, t h a t a c o u r t w i l l n o t l i g h t l y e n t e r t a i n a c l a i m under t h i s head and t h a t a l l l e g a l forms must be 37 c o m p l i e d w i t h i n t h i s r e g a r d . Thus i n Nay v Nay t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l s e t a s i d e t h a t p a r t o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t judgment i n which a s a l e t o t h e d e f e n d a n t husband's f a t h e r was s a i d t o f a l l w i t h i n s.10. The t r i a l j u d g e , E g b e r t J . , had h e l d t h a t t h e p u r c h a s e r ought t o have known t h a t the s a l e had been made w i t h a view t o d e f e a t i n g t h e w i f e ' s c l a i m and t h a t , a c c o r d i n g l y , t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s i n t e r e s t r e m a i n e d c r e d i t e d t o him. The C o u r t o f A p p e a l f o u n d , however, t h a t E g b e r t J . had f a i l e d t o g i v e the f a t h e r the r i g h t s g r a n t e d t o him, as a d e f e n d a n t , under t h e R u l e s o f C o u r t . The R u l e s o f C o u r t r e l a t i n g t o a s t a t e m e n t o f c l a i m a p p l i e d t o a n o t i c e g i v e n t o a donee or a t r a n s f e r e e p u r s u a n t t o s.10 o f t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t . Onus o f p r o o f One p r a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t y o f t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t p r o o f . Under t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n w h i c h has a r i s e n i n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n c e r n s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e onus o f d e s c r i b e d i n s.7, each c a t e g o r y a p p e a r s •2 3-t o c a l l f o r a d i f f e r e n t onus o f p r o o f . The i s s u e o f t h e onus o f p r o o f i s n o t d i s c u s s e d i n t h e A c t . The c a t e g o r i e s , however, are p h r a s e d i n s u c h a way as t o s u g g e s t t h a t : (a) The owner spouse b e a r s t h e onus o f p r o v i n g t h a t p r o p e r t y i s exempt under s.7(2) ; (b) The non-owner spouse .bears t h e onus o f p r o v i n g h i s o r h e r e n t i t l e m e n t t o p r o p e r t y d e s c r i b e d i n s . 7 ( 3 ) ; (c) The owner spouse b e a r s t h e b u r d e n o f p r o v i n g t h a t ' an e q u a l . ' d i v i s i o n would'.be u n j u s t and I h e . q u i t a b l e J'under s. 7 (4) , t h e r e b y r e b u t t i n g t h e p r e s u m p t i o n i n f a v o u r o f an e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f a s s e t s under t h i s h ead. The c o n t r a s t i n g o n u s s e s o f p r o o f w i l l o b v i o u s l y have a b e a r i n g on how a c o u r t w i l l a p p l y t h e c r i t e r i a l i s t e d i n s.8 and so d e c i d e i n what p r o p o r t i o n t h e m a r i t a l p r o p e r t y s h o u l d be d i v i d e d . I f t h e a s s u m p t i o n s made above are c o r r e c t , t h e n w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r o p e r t y f a l l i n g w i t h i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 3 ) , t h e s.8 f a c t o r s a r e t o be u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e what the d i s t r i b u t i o n s h o u l d be, whereas i n r e s p e c t t o p r o p e r t y f a l l i n g w i t h i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 4 ) , t h e f a c t o r s a r e t o be used t o r e b u t t h e p r e s u m p t i o n o f e q u a l s h a r i n g . I n i t i a l c a s e s under th e A c t a p p e a r n o t t o have g i v e n due c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o t h e d i f f e r e n t b u r d e n s o f p r o o f . In Haminuke v Haminuke one o f t h e e a r l i e s t c a s e s t o be d e c i d e d under t h e new l e g i s l a t i o n , t h e t o t a l a s s e t s o f the d e f e n d a n t were d e s c r i b e d as b e i n g d i s t r i b u t a b l e under s.7(3) . The p r o p e r t y , however, was e x p r e s s l y s t a t e d t o have been a c q u i r e d by t h e p a r t i e s w h i l e t h e y were l i v i n g t o g e t h e r . On t h i s b a s i s t h e a s s e t s s h o u l d have been d i s t r i b u t e d under s.7(4) , u n l e s s t h e y c o u l d be c a t e g o r i s e d as f a l l i n g w i t h i n t h e e n u m e r a t e d s u b s e c t i o n s o f s . 7 ( 3 ) . - 2 4 -H a v i n g f a i l e d t o c l a s s i f y the p r o p e r t y c o r r e c t l y , t h e c o u r t c o u l d n o t a c c o r d i n g l y have d e t e r m i n e d whether t h e a p p r o p r i a t e o n u s s e s o f p r o o f had been s a t i s i f i e d . By c o n t r a s t , l a t e r c a s e s have r e c o g n i s e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e 39 40 o f a c o r r e c t c a t e g o r i z a t i o n . Thus m B a k e r v B a k e r , P u r v i s J . n o t e d : The i m p o r t a n c e o f c l a s s i f y i n g t h e p r o p e r t y f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n under s . 7 ( 3 ) o r ( 4 ) i s t h a t under s . 7 ( 4 ) t h e r e i s a d i s c r e t i o n to d i v i d e e q u a l l y w i t h t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f on t h e p a r t y who s eeks an u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n . S h a r i n g o f d e b t s A q u e s t i o n which has y e t t o be t o u c h e d upon by t h e c o u r t s i s whether the n e t l o s s e s o f a spouse are s h a r e a b l e a t t r i a l . T h i s i s s u e i s r e l e v a n t b o t h under s . 7 ( 4 ) , i n r e l a t i o n t o a s p o u s e ' s o v e r a l l debt s i t u a t i o n , and under s . 7 ( 3 ) , i n r e l a t i o n t o the d e c r e a s i n g v a l u e os a p i e c e o f exempt p r o p e r t y . I t i s n o t e v i d e n t from th e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t w hether s . 7 ( 4 ) would i n c l u d e t h e s h a r i n g o f t h e d e b t s o f a spouse whose t o t a l a s s e t p o s i t i o n i s a n e g a t i v e one a t t h e t i m e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n . The word " p r o p e r t y " n o r m a l l y s u g g e s t s a " c r e d i t " as o p p o s e d t o a " d e b i t " f i n a n c i a l s t a t u s , so t h a t w h i l e a s p o u s e w o u l d be e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e i n d e b t s owed t o h i s o r h e r s p o u s e , he o r she would n o t n o r m a l l y e x p e c t t o b e a r a s h a r e o f t h a t p a r t n e r ' s o b l i g a t i o n s t o o t h e r s . I t i s a r g u a b l e t h a t , as t h e l e g i s l a t i o n made no s p e c i f i c p r o v i s i o n f o r t h e s h a r i n g o f t h e d e b t s and l i a b i l i t i e s o f a s p o u s e , such debts s h o u l d n o t be i n c l u d e d i n a s s e s s i n g t h e a s s e t s i t u a t i o n o f each spouse at t h e t i m e o f t r i a l . In p r a c t i c e the q u e s t i o n i s l i k e l y t o be of academic i n t e r e s t o n l y , f o r the c o u r t s c o u l d , i f n e c e s s a r y , o r d e r an u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e r e m a i n i n g m a r i t a l a s s e t s under s.8 i n - 2 5 -o r d e r t o c o m p e n s a t e t h e d e b t o r s p o u s e . S e c t i o n 7 ( 3 ) , a t f i r s t s i g h t , s e e m s t o c o u n t e n a n c e s o m e s h a r i n g o f l o s s e s . T h e s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e v a l u e o f a n e x e m p t i o n a t t r i b u t e d t o a p i e c e o f p r o p e r t y u n d e r s . 7 ( 2 ) a n d t h e m a r k e t v a l u e o f t h e s a m e p r o p e r t y , o r o f p r o p e r t y s u b s t i t u t e d f o r i t , e i t h e r i n e x c h a n g e o r a c q u i r e d w i t h t h e p r o c e e d s o f i t s d i s p o s i t i o n , a t t h e t i m e o f t h e t r i a l . I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t d u r i n g a p e r i o d o f d e c l i n i n g m a r k e t v a l u e s , t h i s d i f f e r e n c e c o u l d c o n s t i t u t e a l o s s . N o c a s e h a s y e t b e e n r e p o r t e d i n w h i c h a n o w n e r s p o u s e h a s a l l e g e d t h a t t h e n o n - o w n i n g s p o u s e o u g h t t o s h a r e i n a l o s s u n d e r s . 7 ( 3 ) ( I t s e e m s e x t r e m e l y u n l i k e l y t h a t a c o u r t w o u l d g r a n t s u c h a n o r d e r , p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n c e t h e n o n - o w n e r s p o u s e w o u l d n o t b e a w a r d e d a s h a r e i n t h e a s s e t i t s e l f b y v i r t u e o f s . 7 ( 2 ) . T h e s i t u a t i o n m a y b e d i f f e r e n t w h e r e t h e r e i s . e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e n o n - o w n i n g s p o u s e i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e d e p r e c i a t i o n i n s o m e w a y . I n t h i s e v e n t i t s e e m s p r o b a b l e t h a t t h e o n u s u n d e r s . 7 ( 3 ) w i l l m o v e f r o m t h e n o n - o w n e r s p o u s e t o t h e o w n e r s p o u s e , . t o p r o v e t h a t t h e n o n - o w n e r s p o u s e o u g h t t o s h a r e i n t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e v a l u e o f t h e e x e m p t i o n a n d t h e ( d e p r e c i a t i n g ) m a r k e t v a l u e o f t h e s a m e p r o p e r t y a t t r i a l . 4 1 S e c t i o n 9 - d i s t r i b u t i o n s u n d e r t h e A c t O n c e t h e c o u r t h a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t a d i s t r i b u t i o n i s t o b e m a d e u n d e r s . 7 , i t i s g i v e n w i d e p o w e r s u n d e r s . 9 i n o r d e r t o e f f e c t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n a n d a p p l y t h e d e t e r m i n e d p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e a c t u a l a s s e t s o w n e d . T h e s e p o w e r s a r e b r o a d l y d e f i n e d i n s . 9 ( 2 ) a s i n c l u d i n g a n o r d e r -26-t o pay money o r t r a n s f e r p r o p e r t y , an o r d e r t o s e l l o r d i v i d e the p r o c e e d s from th e s a l e o f the p r o p e r t y , o r an o r d e r d e c l a r i n g t h a t a s p o u s e has an i n t e r e s t i n p r o p e r t y . E a r l y c a s e s i n d i c a t e d a c e r t a i n r e l u c t a n c e on t h e p a r t o f t h e c o u r t s t o e x e r c i s e t h e i r powers i n t h i s 4 2 r e g a r d . In M a r g u a r d s o n v M a r q u a r d s o n , f o r example, t h e r e was an o b v i o u s r e l u c t a n c e on the p a r t o f the c o u r t t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h an on-g o i n g b u s i n e s s and t h e c o u r t d e l i b e r a t e l y a v o i d e d t a k i n g a c t i o n w h i c h might have r e s u l t e d i n t h e b u s i n e s s b e i n g wound up. I n s t e a d , H .'J.. MacDonald J . e l e c t e d t o a l l o w r e l i e f t o the w i f e . u n d e r t h e Divorce" A c t , by p r o v i d i n g h e r w i t h a lump sum and p e r i o d i c m a i n t e n a n c e . T h i s d e c i s i o n 44 has been s t r o n g l y c r i t i c i z e d by P e t e r Lown , p a r t i c u l a r l y as t h e r e •appears t o have been an a bsence o f any s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e as t o the t a x l i a b i l i t y w h ich might have been i n c u r r e d by t h e husband i f he were f o r c e d t o s e l l , a f a c t o r w i t h which the c o u r t e x p r e s s e d i t s e l f much c o n c e r n e d . In s u b s e q u e n t c a s e s t h e c o u r t s have been more w i l l i n g t o o r d e r a s a l e and d i v i s i o n o f s p e c i f i c a s s e t s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e c o u r t s a r e s t i l l l o a t h e t o o r d e r a d i v i s i o n o f an o n - g o i n g economic u n i t where i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h i s w ould c o n s t i t u t e an undue b u r d e n on t h e owner s p o u s e , as where i t would n e c e s s i t a t e a s a l e o f t h e b u s i n e s s . . T h e p r e f e r r e d c o u r s e i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s seems t o be, i f p o s s i b l e , t o a l l o w t h e owner s p o u s e t i m e t o a r r a n g e f i n a n c e w h i l e m a i n t a i n i n g t h e e conomic 45 u n i t . T h i s was t h e a p p r o a c h t a k e n i n M e r g l v y M e r g l . In t h i s case t h e c o u r t d e c l i n e d t o o r d e r a s a l e o f the husband's f a r m l a n d . I n s t e a d i t o r d e r e d t h a t the w i f e be e n t i t l e d t o #80,000, p l u s i n t e r e s t , c o n s t i t u t i n g a c h a r g e on t h e l a n d w i t h t i m e f o r the h u s b a n d t o a r r a n g e s u c h a 46 payment. S i m i l a r l y i n Fox v Fox , a n o t h e r case c o n c e r n i n g f a r m p r o p e r t y , where b o t h p a r t i e s w i s h e d t h a t the farm be r e t a i n e d and t h a t the d e f e n d a n t h usband remain on t h e farm, th e h u s b and was o r d e r e d t o pay #60,000 t o -2 7-h i s w i f e . He was p e r m i t t e d to s t a y on t h e farm and r e t a i n t h e income from i t b u t was t o h o l d t h e p r o p e r t y as t r u s t e e f o r h i m s e l f and h i s 47 w i f e . In H e g e l v He ge1 t h e s o l u t i o n c hosen by t h e c o u r t was t o award the w i f e t h e husband's i n t e r e s t i n a s e c t i o n o f farm p r o p e r t y , s u b j e c t 48 t o a c r o p s h a r e l e a s e t o him. In E a r l v E a r l a somewhat s i m i l a r a p p r o a c h was t a k e n . In o r d e r t o p r e v e n t t h e d i s r u p t i o n o f t h e f a r m i n g o p e r a t i o n , t h e h u s b and was p e r m i t t e d t o r e t a i n t h e m a j o r i t y o f the l a n d s , s u b j e c t t o a t e n y e a r mortgage i n f a v o u r o f the w i f e t o s e c u r e #160,000 under the judgment, and t h e l a n d s t r a n s f e r r e d t o the w i f e were o r d e r e d t o be l e a s e d t o t h e h u s b a n d f o r an i d e n t i c a l t e n y e a r t e r m on t h e b a s i s o f the terms o f p r e v a i l i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d l e a s e s i n t h e a r e a . T h e r e a p p e a r t o have been no r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n s s i n c e M a r g u a r d s o n i n w h i c h o t h e r t y p e s o f b u s i n e s s c o n c e r n s have been s i m i l a r l y d e a l t w i t h under s.9. G i v e n t h e w i d e - r a n g i n g d e f i n i t i o n o f " p r o p e r t y " w i t h i n 49 the M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t , w h i c h i n K o m i l i v K o m i l i was h e l d t o i n c l u d e t h e husband's u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a c c o u n t a n c y b u s i n e s s and a computer u s e d t h e r e i n , i t i s p r o b a b l e t h a t t h e c o u r t s w i l l e v e n t u a l l y have t o d e c i d e w h e t h e r a l t e r n a t i v e s h a r i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s would be a p p r o p r i a t e f o r s u c h b u s i n e s s c o n c e r n s . H a v i n g r e g a r d t o t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s t o d e v i s e s u c h a r r a n g e m e n t s i n c a s e s c o n c e r n i n g farm p r o p e r t y , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e y w i l l be e q u a l l y p r e p a r e d t o make a l t e r n a t i v e d i s t r i b u t i o n s i n r e l a t i o n t o b u s i n e s s e n t e r p r i s e s . Some c o n c e r n may p e r h a p s be e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e c o u r t s when f a c e d w i t h t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f b u s i n e s s a s s e t s w h i c h a r e h e l d by an i n c o r p o r a t e d company. I t i s u n c l e a r as y e t w hether t h e c o u r t s w i l l be w i l l i n g t o " l i f t t h e c o r p o r a t e v e i l " i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s and t r e a t the a s s e t s -28-o f a company as b e l o n g i n g p e r s o n a l l y t o t h e spouse who had c o n t r o l of t h a t company. The o n l y r e p o r t e d case t o u c h i n g on t h i s i s s u e t o da t e i s G a b r i e 1 v G a b r i e l and K e i t h o f London B o r o u g h ^ 0 . In t h i s i n s t a n c e the w i f e had j o i n e d as c o - d e f e n d a n t t o h e r a c t i o n a company i n w h i c h h e r husband owned 95 s h a r e s and she owned 5. The company had a t o t a l o f 100 s h a r e s and the husband and w i f e were t h e s o l e s h a r e h o l d e r s and d i r e c t o r s . A f t e r h a v i n g had c i t e d t o i t a number o f a u t h o r i t i e s commenting upon t h e n a t u r e o f c o r p o r a t e p e r s o n a l i t y , t h e c o u r t d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e i s s u e i t had t o d e c i d e was whether o r n o t i t c o u l d d e a l w i t h t h e a s s e t s o f t h e company, r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e s h a r e s , or m e r e l y t h e s h a r e s t h e m s e l v e s . In o t h e r words, t h e c o u r t had t o d e c i d e w hether i t would p i e r c e t h e c o r p o r a t e v e i l i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h an a p p l i c a t i o n under t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t . The c o u r t u l t i m a t l e y d e c i d e d t h a t i t d i d not have t h i s power, p a r t i c u l a r l y as t h e r e had been no a l l e g a t i o n o f an a t t e m p t t o c o n c e a l , w h i c h i s one o f t h e few grounds on w h i c h t h e 51 c o u r t s w i l l t a k e such a c t i o n i n c i v i l c a s e s . In a r r i v i n g at t h i s d e c i s i o n the c o u r t was much i m p r e s s e d by t h e f a c t t h a t t h e w i f e , as d i r e c t o r and s h a r e h o l d e r , w o u l d i n f a c t have a c c e s s t o a l l t h e r e c o r d s o f the company and was t h e r e f o r e i n a p o s i t i o n t o p r e s e n t e v i d e n c e t o the c o u r t as t o t h e a s s e t s o f t h e company. With t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n t h e c o u r t c o u l d make d i r e c t i o n as t o what was t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e p a r t i e s , namely t h e s h a r e s , and c o u l d , i f i t were e q u i t a b l e t o do s o , d i r e c t e i t h e r p a r t y t o t r a n s f e r any of the s h a r e s t o t h e o t h e r . I t i s u n c e r t a i n what t h e p o s i t i o n o f a c o u r t w o u l d be i f a spouse was n o t , i n f a c t , i n a p o s i t i o n t o a s c e r t a i n t h e a s s e t s o f a company or t o e v a l u a t e t h e w o r t h o f c o r p o r a t e s h a r e s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e o t h e r . In such a case i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e husband c o u l d be r e q u i r e d t o -29-d i s c l o s e the company's a s s e t s o r t h a t t h e c o u r t c o u l d make t h e company a p a r t y t o t h e a c t i o n . I f t h e r e was any e v i d e n c e o f f r a u d o r c o n c e a l m e n t o f t h e c o r p o r a t e a s s e t s , t h e c o u r t w o u l d p r o b a b l y be w i l l i n g t o j o i n t h e company as c o - d e f e n d a n t under s.10. I t may be n e c e s s a r y f o r a c o u r t t o j o i n t h e company as a c o -d e f e n d a n t i n o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s . Thus even i f the c o u r t d e c i d e s t o b y - p a s s t h e company and s i m p l y order' a t r a n s f e r o f s h a r e s , t h e c o -o p e r a t i o n o f t h e company wo u l d s t i l l be n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o stamp the r e q u i s i t e f o r m s , r e g i s t e r t h e t r a n s f e r and i s s u e t h e new s h a r e -'.,.-,' c e r t i f i c a t e . I t c o u l d be a r g u e d t h a t t h e c o u r t would have power t o d i r e c t t h e company i n t h i s r e g a r d under s . 9 ( 3 ) (f) , w h i c h empowers t h e c o u r t t o make any o r d e r w h i c h , i n t h e o p i n i o n o f the c o u r t , i s n e c e s s a r y . -30-The M a t r i m o n i a l Home The m a t r i m o n i a l home and h o u s e h o l d goods used i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h i t are d e a l t w i t h under P a r t I I o f the M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t , which c o n f e r s a w i d e - r a n g i n g d i s c r e t i o n on t h e c o u r t t o o r d e r i n t e r i m and permanent p o s s e s s i o n o f the p r o p e r t i e s . S e c t i o n 1(c) o f the A c t ' d e f i n e s " m a t r i m o n i a l home" as p r o p e r t y : ( i ) t h a t i s owned o r l e a s e d by one o r b o t h o f t h e s p o u s e s , ( i i ) t h a t i s o r has been o c c u p i e d by t h e s p o u s e s as t h e i r f a m i l y home, and ( i i i ) t h a t i s (A) a h o u s e , or. p a r t o f a h o u s e , t h a t i s a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d d w e l l i n g u n i t , (B) p a r t o f b u s i n e s s p r e m i s e s u s e d as l i v i n g a c c o m o d a t i o n , (C) a m o b i l e home, (D) a r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t as d e f i n e d i n The Condominium  P r o p e r t i e s A c t , or (E) a s u i t e . No c a s e s have y e t been r e p o r t e d i n wh i c h t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f the m a t r i m o n i a l home has been d i s c u s s e d . One q u e s t i o n as y e t t o be d e t e r m i n e d i s w h e t h e r a m a t r i m o n i a l home can e v e r l o s e i t s c h a r a c t e r as s u c h . The d e f i n i t i o n i n s . l ( c ) d e s c r i b e s a m a t r i m o n i a l home as one " t h a t i s o r has been o c c u p i e d by t h e s p o u s e s as t h e i r f a m i l y home". I t th u s seems t h a t once a p r o p e r t y has a t any t i m e been o c c u p i e d as a f a m i l y r e s i d e n c e , i t rema i n s a m a t r i m o n i a l home t o t h e date o f t r i a l ) even i f i t has n o t a c t u a l l y been u s e d as t h e f a m i l y r e s i d e n c e f o r many y e a r s . A n o t h e r q u e s t i o n as y e t t o be d e c i d e d by the- c o u r t s i s the l e n g t h o f r e s i d e n c e r e q u i r e d t o e s t a b l i s h a p r o p e r t y as the m a t r i m o n i a l home. -31-F o r e x a m p l e , w o u l d a summer c o t t a g e o c c u p i e d t h r e e m o n t h s o u t o f e v e r y y e a r q u a l i f y u n d e r s . l ( c ) ? I f n o t , how e x t e n d e d a r e s i d e n c e i s r e q u i r e d t o r e n d e r a h o u s e a m a t r i m o n i a l home? I s t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e s p o u s e s r e l e v a n t i n t h i s r e g a r d ? T h e s e q u e s t i o n s a r e a l l l e f t u n a n s w e r e d b y t h e A c t a n d h a v e y e t t o be d e a l t w i t h b y t h e c o u r t s . H o u s e h o l d g o o d s a r e d e f i n e d a t s . l ( b ) o f t h e A c t a s - p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y : ( i ) t h a t i s o w n e d b y o n e o r b o t h s p o u s e s , a n d ( i i ) t h a t was o r d i n a r i l y u s e d o r e n j o y e d b y o n e o r b o t h s p o u s e s o r one o r more o f t h e c h i l d r e n r e s i d i n g i n t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home, f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , h o u s e h o l d , e d u c a t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l , s o c i a l o r a e s t h e t i c p u r p o s e s . T h i s i s t h e s o l e a r e a i n w h i c h t h e " u s e r t e s t " i s e m p l o y e d b y t h e M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t . A s w i t h - t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home, t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f " h o u s e h o l d g o o d s " h a s n o t y e t a r i s e n f o r d i s c u s s i o n i n a n y o f t h e r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n s o f t h e A l b e r t a c o u r t s . T h e d e f i n i t i o n i s f r a m e d b r o a d l y e n o u g h t o i n c l u d e i t e m s s u c h as h e i r l o o m s , w o r k s o f a r t , p e r s o n a l c l o t h i n g o r j e w e l l e r y a n d p r o p e r t y u s e d i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a h o b b y , i t e m s w h i c h u n d e r s i m i l a r l e g i s l a t i o n i n o t h e r p r o v i n c e s 5 2 a r e s p e c i f i c a l l y e x c l u d e d f r o m d i s t r i b u t i o n . W h e t h e r t h e A l b e r t a c o u r t s w i l l i n p r a c t i c e e x c l u d e s u c h p r o p e r t y f r o m o r d e r s made u n d e r t h i s p a r t o f t h e A c t r e m a i n s t o b e s e e n . -32-F o o t n o t e s t o C h a p t e r I 1. R e p o r t No. 18, M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y , Edmonton, A u g u s t 1975. 2. R.S.A. 1980, c.M-9. 3. (19 7 9 ) , 9 R.F.L. (2d)' 358, a t p.359 ( A l t a . C . A.). 4. S up r a, n.2, s.8. 5. A l t a . Q.B., V e i t J . , Edmonton, J u l y 8, 1982 ( u n r e p o r t e d ) . 6 . S . 7(2) . 7. S . 7 ( 3) . 8. S. 7 (4) . 9. ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 23 R.F.L.(2d) 113; A l t a . L.R.(2d) 357; 30 A.R. 41 ( A l t a . C . A . ) . 10. :[l98o] 2 S.C.R. 834; 117 D.L.R.(3d) 257 ( S . C . C . ) . 11. (1981), 20 R.F.L.(2d) 289 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 12. A l t a . Q.B.', C a l g a r y , September 19, 1980 ( u n r e p o r t e d ) . 13. ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 27 A.R. 341 (Q.B.). 14. S.7(3) p r o v i d e s t h a t the c o u r t may d i s t r i b u t e , as i t c o n s i d e r s j u s t and e q u i t a b l e , p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by a spouse by g i f t from t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . 15. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 24 R.F.L.(2d) 21 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 16. S u p r a , n.9. 17. I b i d , p.121. 18. (19 8 1 ) , 15 A^L.R.(2d) 339; 23 R.F.L.(2d) 37 (Q.B.). 19. Mr. E.F. Anthony M e r c h a n t , i n an a n n o t a t i o n t o the case o f B a i n s v B a i n s , ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 17 R.F.L.(2d) 193, a t p.195 (Sask. Q.B.). 20. S u p r a , n.18, a t p.344. 21. I b i d , p.345. 22. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 24 R.F.L.(2d) 44 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 23. ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 23 R.F.L.(2d) 57 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 24. I b i d , p.63. 25. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 26 R.F.L. (2d) 2 33 ( A l t a . Q.B.). -33-26. ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 22 R.F.L.(2d) 322 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 27. See a n n o t a t i o n t o Groenweg v Groenweg, s u p r a , n.26, a t pp.322 , 323 , p e r P r o f e s s o r McLeod. 28. S u p r a , n.9. 29. S u p r a , n.2 3. 30. I b i d , p.61. 31. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 37 A.R. 57 ( C . A . ) . 3 2. S u p r a , n.9. 33. I b i d , p.120. 3 4. S u p r a , n.31. 35. S.7 (3) (c) . 36. One o f t h e a n o m o l i e s i n t h e A l b e r t a s t a t u t e i s t h e f a c t t h a t p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d a f t e r a d e c r e e n i s i o f d i v o r c e f a l l s w i t h i n t h e c a t e g o r y o f d i s t r i b u t a b l e p r o p e r t y ( s . 7 ( 3 ) ( c ) ) whereas p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d a f t e r t h e p a r t i e s have c o m m e n c e d . l i v i n g s e p a r a t e and a p a r t b u t b e f o r e a d e c r e e n i s i o f d i v o r c e has been o b t a i n e d f a l l s t o be d e a l t w i t h as d i v i s i b l e p r o p e r t y under s . 7 ( 4 ) . 37. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 34 A.R. 221 ( C . A . ) . 38. (1980) , 10 A.L.R.(2d) 226 ( S . C . ) . 39. ( 1 9 8 2 ) , 24 R.F.L.(2d) 21 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 40. I b i d , a t p.23. 41. T h i s s e c t i o n i s n o t i n t e n d e d t o be an i n - d e p t h a n a l y s i s o f t h e manner i n w h i c h th e A l b e r t a c o u r t s e x e r c i s e t h e i r d i s c r e t i o n i n m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y c a s e s . I t - i s s o u g h t m e r e l y t o i n d i c a t e t h a t , a l t h o u g h p r o p e r t y may be p r i m a f a c i e s h a r e a b l e , t h e c o u r t s may d e c l i n e t o o r d e r ' i t s d i s t r i b u t i o n where d i v i s i o n w o u l d c o n s t i t u t e an undue b u r d e n on t h e owner s p o u s e . 42. ( 1 9 8 0 ) , l O A.L.R.(2d) 247 (Q.B.). 43. R.S.C. 1970, c.D-8. 44. The M a t r i m o n i a l P r o p e r t y A c t , One Y e a r o f O p e r a t i o n : P e t e r J.M. Lown, (1980) 18 A l t a . L. Rev. 317, a t pp. 32.1-2. 45. (1981), 15 A.L.R. (2 d) 278 (Q.B.). 46. ( 1 9 8 1 ) , 21 R.F.L.(2d) 165 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 47. A l t a . Q.B., C a l g a r y V May 28, 1981, K i r b y J . , ( u n r e p o r t e d ) . -34-43. A l t a . Q.B., C a l g a r y , A u g u st 16 , 1 9 3 2 , K i r b y J . , ( u n r e p o r t e d ) . 49. (1982), 24 R.F.L.(2d) 158 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 50. (1 9 8 0 ) , 14 R.F.L.(2d) 174 ( A l t a . C . A . ) . 51. F o r more d i s c u s s i o n as t o when a c o u r t w i l l " l i f t t h e c o r p o r a t e v e i l " , see Gore-Brown on Companies, 42 ed, (1972) , a t . p . 6 . 52. F o r example, under s.2(e) o f t h e M a r i t a l P r o p e r t y A c t , 1979 ( S a s k ) , c.7-6.1. -35-C h a p t e r 2 - B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a T h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t 1 w a s p a s s e d b y t h e L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a i n 1978 and became e f f e c t i v e on March 31, 1979, e x c e p t f o r s.47, s.50 and a p o r t i o n o f s . 6 1 ( l ) . Amendments t o s e v e r a l s e c t i o n s o f the A c t were p a s s e d by t h e L e g i s l a t i v e Assembly i n J u l y 2 1979 . These amendments and t h e p r e v i o u s l y u n p r o c l a i m e d s e c t i o n s o f t h e 3 A c t came i n t o f o r c e on September 14, 1979 . Reforms i n the o l d s y s t e m o f s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y had been i n i t i a t e d i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a b e f o r e the i n c e p t i o n o f t h e .1978 s t a t u t e . In 1972, 4 s.8 o f a n o t h e r F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t was p r o c l a i m e d i n f o r c e i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . I t p r o v i d e d : 8(1) Where, t h e c o u r t makes an o r d e r f o r d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e o r j u d i c i a l s e p a r a t i o n o r d e c l a r i n g a m a r r i a g e t o be n u l l and v o i d .and i t ' a p p e a r s . t h a t a,.spouse i s e n t i t l e d t o any p r o p e r t y , i t may, n o t more t h a n two y e a r s from the dat e o f t h e o r d e r , make any o r d e r t h a t , i n i t s o p i n i o n , s h o u l d be made t o p r o v i d e f o r the a p p l i c a t i o n o f a l l or p a r t o f the p r o p e r t y , i n c l u d i n g s e t t l e d p r o p e r t y , f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f e i t h e r o r b o t h s p o u s e s o r t h e c h i l d o f a. sgo,use o f the \ m a r r i a g e . - * (2) Where the c o u r t makes an o r d e r under s u b s . ( l ) , i t may o r d e r t h a t t h e p r o p e r t y be s o l d and d i r e c t t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f the p r o c e e d s . In some o f t h e e a r l y c a s e s under t h i s s e c t i o n , c o u n s e l s u b m i t t e d t h a t the p r o v i s i o n was n o t i n t e n d e d t o e f f e c t any changes i n t h e s u b s t a n t i v e law. The c o u r t s n e v e r t h e l e s s p r o c e e d e d as i f s.8 d i d g i v e them t h e power t o make c o n s i d e r a b l e i n r o a d s i n t o t h e e x i s t i n g m a t r i m o n i a l r e g i m e o f s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y . T h i s e x p a n s i v e view o f s.8 was e n d o r s e d i n the B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a C o u r t o f A p p e a l d e c i s i o n i n -36-D e e l e u w v D e e l e u w " . F o l l o w i n g o n t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f s.8 o f t h e 1972 A c t , a R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n u n d e r t h e c h a i r m a n s h i p o f B e r g e r J . was a p p o i n t e d i n D e c e m b e r 1973 . T h a t c o m m i s s i o n s u b m i t t e d i t s r e p o r t on m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y i n M a r c h 1975. T h e r e p o r t r e j e c t e d t h e r e t e n t i o n o f t h e s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y a p p r o a c h a n d r e c o m m e n d e d t h e a d o p t i o n o f " f u l l a n d i m m e d i a t e c o m m u n i t y o f p r o p e r t y " . T h e c o m m i s s i o n t o o k t h e v i e w t h a t s u c h a c o m m u n i t y p r o p e r t y a p p r o a c h b e t t e r r e f l e c t e d t h e c o n t e m p o r y v i e w o f m a r r i a g e . I t d i d n o t r e d u c e i t s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o d r a f t l e g i s l a t i o n . T h e r e p o r t o f t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n p r o b a b l y s e r v e d t o s t i m u l a t e a d e s i r e t o c h a n g e t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y . I t c o u l d n o t b e s a i d , h o w e v e r , t h a t t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t o f 1978 was b a s e d o n t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s o f t h e R o y a l C o m m i s s i o n . I n f a c t t h e new l e g i s l a t i o n h a s , i f a n y t h i n g , r e s t r i c t e d t h e p o w e r s w h i c h t h e c o u r t s h a d b e e n e x e r c i s i n g u n d e r t h e s.8 p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e 1972 A c t . U n d e r t h e 1972 A c t a j u d g e was g i v e n no l e g i s l a t i v e g u i d e l i n e s a s t o t h e p r o p e r t y w h i c h m i g h t b e c o v e r e d b y t h e s t a t u t e , n o r was t h e r e i n d i c a t e d a l i s t o f f a c t o r s w h i c h a c o u r t c o u l d c o n s i d e r i n t h e e x e r c i s e o f i t s d i s c r e t i o n . T h e new l e g i s l a t i o n d e a l s w i t h t h e s e m a t t e r s , a n d m o r e , i n s u b s t a n t i a l d e t a i 1 . T h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , 19 7 8 M a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y i s t h e s u b j e c t o f P a r t 3 o f t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , w h i c h i n c l u d e s s s . 4 3 t o 55. T h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e o f - 3 7 -P a r t 3 i s t h a t . u p o n the breakdown o f a m a r r i a g e , e v i d e n c e d by c e r t a i n e v e n t s s p e c i f i e d i n s . 4 3 ( s e p a r a t i o n agreement, o r d e r f o r d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e , o r d e r o f n u l l i t y , d e c l a r a t o r y judgment t h a t t h e s p o u s e s have no r e a s o n a b l e p r o s p e c t o f r e c o n c i l i a t i o n ) , each spouse becomes e n t i t l e d to an u n d i v i d e d o n e - h a l f i n t e r e s t i n the f a m i l y a s s e t s as a t e n a n t i n common. The te r m " f a m i l y a s s e t s " i s d e f i n e d i n s s . 4 5 and 4 6 . S e c t i o n 4 8 makes p r o v i s i o n f o r t h e s i g n i n g o f s e p a r a t i o n agreements and s . 5 1 , r e c o g n i s i n g t h a t a d i v i s i o n o f a s s e t s under s . 4 3 o r a m a r r i a g e agreement may be u n f a i r , p e r m i t s t h e c o u r t t o make an u n e q u a l a p p o r t i o n m e n t . The e f f e c t o f t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t upon m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y law i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a i s t h a t t h e d o c t r i n e o f s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y i s r e t a i n e d u n t i l t h e occ ur r,en ce VO f. one J o f t'h.e' event's enumerated i n s , . . . 43 . A f t e r the o c c u r r e n c e o f one o f t h e s . 4 3 e v e n t s , t h e r e i s a community o f p r o p e r t y w i t h r e s p e c t t o " f a m i l y a s s e t s " . The l e g i s l a t i o n r e s e m b l e s 7 most c l o s e l y t h e m a t r i m o n i a l r e f o r m l e g i s l a t i o n i n O n t a r i o i n t h i s r e g a r d . From time t o t i m e , a c c o r d i n g l y , p a r a l l e l s , w i l l be drawn between the two r e g i m e s to i l l u s t r a t e d i f f e r e n c e s i n s u b s t a n c e or i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and p o s s i b l e f u t u r e a p p r o c a h e s w h i c h may be t a k e n by t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a c o u r t s . F a m i l y A s s e t s Once an e n t i t l e m e n t t o s h a r e i n f a m i l y a s s e t s has a r i s e n by v i r t u e o f s . 4 3 , i t i s i m p o r t a n t to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h p r o p e r t y b e l o n g i n - g t o the s p o u s e s f a l l s i n t o t h i s c l a s s o f a s s e t s . S e c t i o n s 4 5 and 4 6 o f the F a m i l y R e l a t i o n ' s A c t d e a l w i t h t h i s i s s u e . They p r o v i d e as f o l l o w s : -38-45 (1) Subj e c t to f o r the p u r p o s e s s.46, t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e A c t . d e f i n e s f a m i l y a s s e t s (2) P r o p e r t y owned by one used by a spouse o r a minor p u r p o s e i s a f a m i l y a s s e t . or b o t h spouses and o r d i n a r i l y c h i l d o f e i t h e r spouse f o r a f a m i l y (2) (3) W i t h o u t r e s t r i c t i n g t h e g e n e r a l i t y o f subs d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s i n c l u d e s (a) where a c o r p o r a t i o n or t r u s t owns p r o p e r t y w o u l d be a f a m i l y a s s e t i f owned by a s p o u s e , ( i ) a s h a r e i n t h e c o r p o r a t i o n ; o r ( i i ) an i n t e r e s t i n t h e t r u s t owned by t h e spous e ; t h e t h a t (b) where p r o p e r t y would be a f a m i l y a s s e t i f owned by a s p o u s e , p r o p e r t y ( i ) o v e r which a spouse h a s, e i t h e r a l o n e or w i t h a n o t h e r p e r s o n , a power o f a p p o i n t m e n t i n f a v o u r o f h i m s e l f ; o r ( i i ) d i s p o s e d o f by a spouse b u t o v e r w h i c h t h e spouse has, e i t h e r a l o n e or w i t h a n o t h e r p e r s o n , a power t o r e v o k e the d i s p o s i t i o n o r a power t o use o r d i s p o s e o f t h e p r o p e r t y ; (c) money o f a spouse i n an a c c o u n t w i t h a s a v i n g s i n s t i t u t i o n where t h a t a c c o u n t i s o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e ; (d) a r i g h t o f a spouse under an a n n u i t y o r a p e n s i o n , home o w n e r s h i p o r r e t i r e m e n t s a v i n g s p l a n ; or (e) a r i g h t , s h a r e o r i n t e r e s t o f a spouse, i n a v e n t u r e t o w hich money o r money's worth was, d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y , c o n t r i b u t e d by o r on b e h a l f o f t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . (4) The d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s a p p l i e s t o m a r r i a g e s e n t e r e d i n t o and p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d b e f o r e o r a f t e r March 31, 1979. 46(1) Where p r o p e r t y i s owned by one spouse t o t h e e x c l u s i o n o f t h e o t h e r a n d . i s u s e d p r i m a r i l y f o r b u s i n e s s p u r p o s e s and where t h e spouse who does n o t own t h e p r o p e r t y made no d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y by t h e o t h e r spouse o r t o the o p e r a t i o n o f t h e b u s i n e s s , t h e p r o p e r t y i s n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t . (2) In s . 4 5 ( 3)' (e ) o r su b s . (1) , an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n i n c l u d e s s a v i n g s t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e management o f h o u s e h o l d o r c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s by t h e spouse who h o l d s no i n t e r e s t i n t h e p r o p e r t y . The d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s may t h u s be d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e -39-c a t e g o r i e s : ( i ) t h o s e a s s e t s w h i c h f a l l w i t h i n the g e n e r a l d e f i n i t i o n ; ( i i ) t h o s e a s s e t s s p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d e d by d e f i n i t i o n ; and ( i i i ) b u s i n e s s a s s e t s w h i c h , a l t h o u g h g e n e r a l l y e x c l u d e d , may become f a m i l y a s s e t s t h r o u g h a d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n by t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . ( i ) G e n e r a l d e f i n i t i o n The g e n e r a l t e s t as to w hether an i t e m o f p r o p e r t y i s a f a m i l y a s s e t i s whether the p r o p e r t y " i s o r d i n a r i l y used by a spouse o r a 8 m i n o r c h i l d o f e i t h e r spouse f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e " . The t e r m " o r d i n a r i l y u s ed" i s n o t d e f i n e d i n t h e s t a t u t e and t h i s r a i s e s a number o f q u e s t i o n s . Does t h e p h r a s e mean t h a t an o b j e c t i v e t e s t s h o u l d be a p p l i e d i n t h i s r e g a r d ? Does the s e c t i o n r e f e r t o how s u c h p r o p e r t y would be o r d i n a r i l y u s e d by most f a m i l i e s or does i t r e q u i r e an e x a m i n a t i o n o f how t h e f a m i l y i n q u e s t i o n u s e d such a s s e t s ? L o g i c would d i c t a t e t h a t t h e l a t t e r a p p r o a c h i s t h e c o r r e c t one. T h e r e a p p e a r s t o be o n l y one r e p o r t e d i n s t a n c e i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a where t h i s p o i n t 9 was s p e c i f i c a l l y ' r a i s e d . I n E l s o m v E1som ^ L o c k e J . had t o c l a s s i f y , among o t h e r i t e m s , a b o a t w h i c h was u s e d by b o t h s p o u s e s f o r a t r i p l a s t i n g 7 t o 10 days i n each o f f o u r y e a r s o f m a r r i a g e , and o t h e r w i s e by t h e h u s b and a l o n e . In h o l d i n g t h a t t h e b o a t c o n s t i t u t e d a f a m i l y 10 a s s e t , he n o t e d : I f t h i s f a m i l y u n i t had s t a y e d t o g e t h e r and p r o s p e r e d , and t h e young boy had grown up t o o r d i n a r y c o u r s e w i t h two p a r e n t s , c o n s i d e r i n g t h e i n t e r e s t E l s o m has and o b v i o u s l y w i l l r e t a i n i n h i s E n g l i s h o r i g i n , i n t e r e s t s and e n t e r p r i s e s , I c a n n o t b u t t h i n k t h a t t h i s b o a t c o n s t i t u t e d p a r t o f what would be c a l l e d t h e o r d i n a r y l i f e s t y l e o f a c o m p a r a t i v e l y w e a l t h y f a m i l y . . . The u n i t i s now b r o k e n ; b u t up to t h e t i m e o f s e p a r a t i o n I t h i n k t h e b o a t was u s e d as I have i n d i c a t e d , above, though l e s s -40-f r e q u e n t l y t h a n would have t a k e n p l a c e i n t h e f u t u r e . I r e p e a t the b o a t was o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e and i s p r o p e r t y owned by one spouse and q u a l i f i e s as a f a m i l y a s s e t w i t h i n s.45(2) o f t h e A c t . What Locke J . seems t o be s a y i n g h e r e i s t h a t t h e f r e q u e n c y w i t h w hich an a s s e t i s u s e d i s not o f p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e . What i s i m p o r t a n t i s t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a r a s s e t , when u s e d , s h o u l d be m o s t l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e r a t h e r t h a n any o t h e r p u r p o s e . In r e a c h i n g h i s c o n c l u s i o n i n t h i s c a s e , he q u o t e d w i t h a p p r o v a l t h e d e c i s i o n o f S t e i n b e r g U.F.C.J, i n t h e O n t a r i o case o f T a y l o r v T a y l o r ^ : " . . . o r d i n a r y u s e r must mean u s e r i n t h e c o u r s e or t h e c u s t o m a r y mode of l i f e o f t h e  p e r s o n c o n c e r n e d and s h o u l d be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h s p e c i a l o r o c c a s i o n a l o r c a s u a l user"; (emphasis added) . C l e a r l y s p e c i a l o r o c c a s i o n a l use w o u l d n o t be s u f f i c i e n t t o c o n s t i t u t e o r d i n a r y u s e r w i t h i n t h e terms o f the B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 12 A c t . Thus i n R o b ertshaw v R o bertshaw i t was h e l d t h a t a s i n g l e day t r i p t o a r e c r e a t i o n a l p r o p e r t y was n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o r e n d e r t h a t p r o p e r t y a f a m i l y a s s e t . The c o u r t i n t h i s i n s t a n c e d i d not make any s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e .t.6" what con's t i t " utes-".'or d i n airy" jase ",. .hpwever. .-It-i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t t h e d e f i n i t i o n i n T a y l o r v T a y l o r may a p p r o p r i a t e l y be a p p l i e d i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . An a s p e c t o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n w hich has c a u s e d f a r more d i f f i c u l t y f o r t h e c o u r t s c o n c e r n s what i s meant by use " f o r a f a m i l y , p u r p o s e " . Wheras t h e O n t a r i o l e g i s l a t i o n s p e c i f i c a l l y d e l i n e a t e s t h e f a m i l y p u r p o s e s w h i c h r e n d e r p r o p e r t y a f a m i l y a s s e t ( s h e l t e r , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 13 h o u s e h o l d , e d u c a t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l , s o c i a l or a e s t h e t i c ) , t h e t e r m " f a m i l y p u r p o s e " i s n o t d e f i n e d i n t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a l e g i s l a t i o n . -41-No c o u r t has y e t a t t e m p t e d t o p r o v i d e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e d e f i n i t i o n o f " f a m i l y p u r p o s e " under t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a A c t . Such a r e l u c t a n c e i s u n d e r s t a n d a b l e as i t would be v i r t u a l l y i m p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t a l l the p o s s i b l e c o m b i n a t i o n s o f s i t u a t i o n s w h i c h might a r i s e i n t h i s r e g a r d . In such c i r c u m s t a n c e s i t might w e l l be t h o u g h t w i s e r t o t r e a t t h i s m a t t e r on a case by c a s e b a s i s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the c o u r t s have n o t always been c o n s i s t e n t i n t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s i m i l a r f a c t s i t u a t i o n s when a s s e s s i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t a s s e t s may be r e g a r d e d as h a v i n g been u s e d f o r t h e r e q u i s i t e p u r p o s e ; One o f t h e i n s t a n c e s i n w h i c h such i n c o n s i s t e n c y has been a p p a r e n t r e l a t e s t o p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d f o r i n v e s t m e n t or i n s u r a n c e p u r p o s e s . Can such p r o p e r t y be r e g a r d e d as b e i n g u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e i f i t i s n o t a c t u a l l y " u s e d " b u t i s m e r e l y r e g a r d e d as an a s s e t o f p o t e n t i a l 14 use? In Bateman v Bateman one o f the a s s e t s i n d i s p u t e was t h e husband's ' l i f e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y . In h o l d i n g . ;,that t h i s was "n.pt a / f a m i l y , a s s e t , ~s C a t l i f f - L . J . S . C . n o t e d : ^ "As t h e r e was no e v i d e n c e t h a t t h i s l i f e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y i s " o r d i n a r i l y u s e d by a spouse f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e " (and I do n o t p r e t e n d t o know what s u c h e v i d e n c e might have been) , I d e c l i n e t o h o l d t h a t t h e husband's i n t e r e s t i n such i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y i s a f a m i l y a s s e t " . T h i s case seems t o i m p l y t h a t a c t u a l u s e r o f an a s s e t i s r e q u i r e d under s.45. In t h i s r e s p e c t i t echoes t h e r e a s o n i n g o f t h e O n t a r i o c a s e s d e a l i n g w i t h p e n s i o n p l a n s . The c o u r t s i n O n t a r i o have c o n s i s t e n t l y h e l d t h a t such p l a n s a r e n o t f a m i l y a s s e t s b e c a u s e , w h i l e a spouse w o u l d e n j o y t h e s e c u r i t y o f knowing t h a t such a p e n s i o n was t h e r e , i t was n o t b e i n g " o r d i n a r i l y used and e n j o y e d " f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e w h i l e i t r e m a i n e d u n p a i d ^ . -42-A somewhat c o n t r a r y p o s i t i o n t o t h a t e x p r e s s e d i n Bateman was ;~ 17 t a k e n i n S i n c l a i r v S i n c l a i r . Here the h u s b a n d ha d p u r c h a s e d a condominium as a t a x s h e l t e r and as an i n v e s t m e n t . P r o v e n z a j o L . J . S . C . 18 h e l d t h a t t h e condominium was a f a m i l y a s s e t . He e x p l a i n e d : The t a x s h e l t e r f e a t u r e w o u l d . r e d u c e the r e s p o n d e n t ' s c u r r e n t income t a x l i a b i l i t y by p e r m i t t i n g c e r t a i n r e d u c t i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e condominium from h i s income. I w o u l d see t h i s as a b e n e f i t t o h i s f a m i l y , as making more d i s p o s a b l e income a v a i l a b l e t o them f o r l i v i n g p u r p o s e s . The i n v e s t m e n t a s p e c t , I s u r m i s e , would be the-hope t h a t t h e r e t u r n on t h e money pu t i n t o the condominium by t h e r e s p o n d e n t w o u l d be g r e a t l y e n h a n c e d i n r e s a l e . In t h i s way, I assume, the r e s p o n d e n t sought t o i n c r e a s e h i s e s t a t e f o r the s e c u r i t y o f h i m s e l f and h i s f a m i l y i n the f u t u r e y e a r s . I t might t h e r e f o r e be a r g u e d f o r t h e s e r e a s o n s t h a t t h e i n t e r e s t i n t h e condominium i s a f a m i l y a s s e t by r e a s o n o f s.45(2) , b e c a u s e i t i s p r o p e r t y owned by the r e s p o n d e n t and o r d i n a r i l y used by him f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . T h i s d e c i s i o n a p p e a r s t o t a l l y a t odds w i t h th e d e c i s i o n i n Bateman v Bateman, and no f u r t h e r c a s e s have been r e p o r t e d i n which t h i s i s s u e has been d i s c u s s e d . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e , however, 19 t h a t i n Dani sh v Dani sh Toy J . , w i t h o u t f u r t h e r comment, d e c l a r e d an i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y b e l o n g i n g t o t h e husband t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t , d e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e p o l i c y was n o t due t o f a l l t o the b e n e f i c i a r y f o r a n o t h e r e l e v e n y e a r s . T h e r e was no i n d i c a t i o n i n t h e r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n as t o how e x a c t l y t h i s p o l i c y was used ( f o r example, whether i t was u s e d as s e c u r i t y f o r a l o a n w hich was i n t u r n used f o r f a m i l y p u r p o s e s ) , b u t i t a p p e a r s t o have been s i m i l a r i n n a t u r e t o t h e l i f e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c y a t i s s u e i n Bateman v Bateman. A s e c o n d i s s u e w h i c h has g i v e n r i s e to some d i s p u t e i n t h i s a r e a i s w h ether e x p e n s i v e j e w e l l e r y and f u r s can q u a l i f y as f a m i l y a s s e t s . 20 The f i r s t r e p o r t e d case d e a l i n g , w i t h t h i s t o p i c was' 'Ja'rvis v J a r v i s ; o f t h e a s s e t s i n d i s p u t e h e r e was an e x p e n s i v e f u r j a c k e t b o u ght by t h e -43-husband f o r t h e w i f e t o wear a t t h e a n n u a l d i n n e r dance b e i n g g i v e n 2 1 by the husband's e m p l o y e r s . V e r c h e r e J . r emarked t h a t : " I n the l i g h t o f t h e s p o u s e s ' c h i l d l e s s l i f e t o g e t h e r " , such a use seemed a " l e g i t i m a t e f a m i l y p u r p o s e " . I t i s n o t c l e a r what r e l e v a n c e the c o u p l e r s c h i l d l e s s n e s s had i n t h i s r e g a r d , o r what d i f f e r e n c e the p r e s e n c e o f a c h i l d w o u l d have h a d on the i s s u e . Nor was i t made c l e a r whether an e x p e n s i v e f u r j a c k e t , b o u g h t f o r a s p e c i f i c o c c a s i o n , was t o be r e g a r d e d d i f f e r e n t l y from a s i m i l a r j a c k e t b o u ght s i m p l y as a g i f t , o r w h ether the v a l u e o f t h e j a c k e t o f i t s e l f meant t h a t i t ought t o be r e g a r d e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t . 2 2 In P e s k e t t v P e s k e t t t h e c o u r t seemed t o assume the l a t t e r p o s i t i o n . In d i s c u s s i n g t h e s t a t u s o f an e x p e n s i v e r i n g owned by the 2 3 w i f e , MacDonald L . J . S . C . commented: "I suppose t h i s w ould o r d i n a r i l y be c l a s s e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t " . He d i d n o t go i n t o the i s s u e i n any d e p t h , however,, and u l t i m a t e l y h e l d t h a t the r i n g s h o u l d v e s t s o l e l y i n t h e p e t i t i o n e r w i f e as i t had been a g i f t f r o m h e r g r a n d m o t h e r . A n o t e o f r e s t r a i n t a g a i n s t a b l a n k e t a p p r o a c h i n t h i s a r e a was '24 sounded i n S i m p k m s v S i m p k i n s . The w i f e i n t h i s c a s e owned some e x p e n s i v e j e w e l l e r y and f u r s and c o u n s e l f o r the, husband u r g e d t h a t 2 5 t h e y be c o n s i d e r e d f a m i l y a s s e t s . S h e p p e r d L . J . S . C . n o t e d : T h e r e was no s u g g e s t i o n t h a t t h e s e were a c q u i r e d as f a m i l y i n v e s t m e n t s o r f o r use by any member o f t h e f a m i l y o t h e r t h a n the w i f e . S e c t i o n 45 o f the F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t .... d e f i n e s a f a m i l y a s s e t as " p r o p e r t y o r d i n a r i l y u s e d . . . f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e " . With r e s p e c t , I f a i l t o see how j e w e l l e r y and f u r s were u s e d " f o r ' a " f a m i l y p u r p o s e " u n l e s s one a r g u e s t h a t t o d r e s s t h e w i f e i n f i n e f u r s and e x p e n s i v e j e w e l l e r y i s a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . I h o l d t h a t t h e s e i t e m s a r e n o t f a m i l y a s s e t s b u t b e l o n g t o t h e w i f e . -44-25a In B a s i v Bas1 , a s i m i l a r a p p r o a c h was t a k e n by T y r w h i t t - D r a k e L . J . S . C . , who h e l d t h a t g o l d and o t h e r j e w e l l e r y w h i c h came t o the w i f e , i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e custom o f I n d i a , a t the time o f t h e m a r r i a g e o f t h e p a r t i e s , was h e r s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y and n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t . The j e w e l l e r y and g o l d had been f o r h e r p e r s o n a l use. 2 6 Hauptman v Hauptman , t h e l a t e s t r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n i n t h i s a r e a , i n d i c a t e s a r e t u r n t o the J a r v i s a p p r o a c h . Once a g a i n , the a s s e t s i n q u e s t i o n c o n s i s t e d o f e x p e n s i v e j e w e l l e r y and f u r s . M c L a c h l i n L.J.S.C. f o u n d t h a t t h e y were f a m i l y a s s e t s b e c a u s e o f the s p e c i f i c p u r p o s e f o r 27 wh i c h t h e y h a d been a c q u i r e d : The e v i d e n c e d i s c l o s e s t h a t t h e y were b o u g h t i n p a r t f o r t h e c r e a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e o f harmony i n the f a m i l y u n i t . A n o t h e r r e a s o n was t h e i m p o r t a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y t o Dr. Hauptman, o f making a f a v o u r a b l e i m p r e s s i o n on c o l l e a g u e s and f r i e n d s : t h i s was a f a m i l y w h i c h n o t o n l y w i s h e d t o l i v e w e l l , b u t t o be p e r c e i v e d as l i v i n g w e l l . These p u r p o s e s were n o t p e r s o n a l t o Mrs. Hauptman; r a t h e r t h e y were f a m i l y p u r p o s e s . I t i s p o s s i b l e t o r e c o n c i l e t h e s e d i f f e r e n t a u t h o r i t i e s i f one a c c e p t s as a g e n e r a l r u l e t h a t where j e w e l l e r y o r o t h e r i t e m s o f x p e n s i v e a p p a r e l a r e p u r c h a s e d f o r p u r p o s e s o f p e r s o n a l adornment o n l y , t h e n t h e y do n o t c o n s t i t u t e f a m i l y a s s e t s . I f the a s s e t s a r e p u r c h a s e d f o r some o t h e r r e a s o n , w h i c h can be r e g a r d e d as b e i n g c o n n e c t e d w i t h the whole f a m i l y , t h e n t h e y do n o t c o n s t i t u t e f a m i l y a s s e t s . Even with/such'-a.. rulg^---the, q u e s t i o n o f what c o n s t i t u t e s a f a m i l y p u r p o s e i s l i k e l y t o cause some d i f f i c u l t y . F o r example, how does one d i s t i n g u i s h between the p u r p o s e i n d i c a t e d i n Hauptman and the s i t u a t i o n where a husband p u r c h a s e s an i t e m o f e x p e n s i v e j e w e l l e r y f o r h i s w i f e ' s b i r t h d a y ? Would t h e l a t t e r p u r c h a s e be r e g a r d e d as h a v i n g been made " f o r t h e c r e a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e o f harmony i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t " ? e -45-I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g 'to n o t e t h a t i n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g M a n i t o b a l e g i s l a t i o n , 2 8 i t e m s o f p e r s o n a l a p p a r e l a r e s p e c i f i c a l l y e x c l u d e d from d i s t r i b u t i o n . . I t i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t such an a p p r o a c h s h o u l d i n g e n e r a l be a d o p t e d by the B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a c o u r t s , w i t h t h e p r o v i s o t h a t where s u c h an i t e m has been p u r c h a s e d as an i n v e s t m e n t i t s h o u l d f a l l w i t h i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t . More complex t h a n the f o r e g o i n g i s s u e s , p e r h a p s , i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r an a s s e t w h i c h i s us e d by o n l y one member o f t h e f a m i l y , o r at l e a s t i s n o t us e d by a l l , may n e v e r t h e l e s s be a f a m i l y a s s e t . T h i s q u e s t i o n i s i m p o r t a n t i n c l a s s i f y i n g a s s e t s p u r c h a s e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n and a l s o i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f a s s e t s u s e d by o n l y one member o f the f a m i l y i n the c o u r s e o f a hobby. U n l i k e the O n t a r i o l e g i s l a t i o n , w h i c h r e q u i r e s t h a t p r o p e r t y be o r d i n a r i l y u s e d o r e n j o y e d by " b o t h s p o u s e s o r one o r more o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n " f o r one o f the f a m i l y p u r p o s e s enumerated i n the O n t a r i o 29 A c t , t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a l e g i s l a t i o n r e q u i r e s o n l y t h a t the p r o p e r t y be u s e d by "a s p o u s e " f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . D e s p i t e t h e b r o a d e r terms o f r e f e r e n c e , t h e c o u r t s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a have sometimes r e q u i r e d t h a t p r o p e r t y s h o u l d be us e d f o r a p u r p o s e c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e whole f a m i l y . The most o b v i o u s example o f t h i s may be seen i n Robertshaw v 2 9a Robertshaw (No.2r . Fawcus J . h e r e h e l d t h a t a b o a t and r e c r e a t i o n a l p r o p e r t y owned by t h e husband were n o t us e d f o r f a m i l y p u r p o s e s b e c a u s e the w i f e , as o p p o s e d t o .the hus b a n d , had n e v e r used them d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e . T h i s f a c t o r s h o u l d c l e a r l y n o t have been r e g a r d e d as d e f i n i t i v e , g i v e n t h e w o r d i n g o f t h e s t a t u t e . I t i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t t h e d e f i n i t i o n employed i n McLennan v McLennan ^ p r e s e n t s a more a c c u r a t e -46-view o f t h e a p p r o a c h which s h o u l d have been t a k e n . I n t h i s c a s e t h e 3 1 meaning o f " f a m i l y p u r p o s e " was e x p r e s s e d a s : "a p u r p o s e c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e whole f a m i l y , n o t m e r e l y one or more i n d i v i d u a l s i n i t . W h i l e p r o p e r t y may a c t u a l l y be used by o n l y one member o f the f a m i l y , the p u r p o s e f o r i t s use must be r e l a t e d t o the f a m i l y g r o u p , which c e a s e s t o e x i s t i n normal c i r c u m s t a n c e s when the s p o u s e s s e p a r a t e " . D e s p i t e t h i s b r o a d e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , i n i t i a l c a s e s under th e A c t c o n t i n u e d to 32 f o l l o w a narrow a p p r o a c h . In Beynon v Beynon , the c o u r t h e l d t h a t a p a i n t i n g and some l i t h o g r a p h s , which had been owned by t h e h u s b a n d p r i o r t o m a r r i a g e , were n o t f a m i l y a s s e t s d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t t h e y were b r o u g h t i n t o the m a t r i m o n i a l home. I t i s n o t c l e a r from t h e r e p o r t e d judgment, however, whether i t was t h e f a c t t h a t t h e p r o p e r t y was owned p r i o r to m a r r i a g e or the f a c t t h a t the p r i n t s were n o t " a p p r e c i a t e d " by t h e w i f e which was t h e d e t e r m i n i n g f a c t o r . F i s c h e r L.J.S.C 3 3 c o n t e n t e d h i m s e l f w i t h s a y i n g : " C l e a r l y , t h e s e i t e m s b e i n g o b j e t s d ' a r t a r e o f v a l u e i n t h e eye o f t h e b e h o l d e r and t h e o r i g i n a l b e h o l d e r was the r e s p o n d e n t " . The same c r i t i c i s m can be l e v e l l e d a g a i n s t 34 Stammler v Stammler , a d e c i s i o n r e f e r r e d t o by F i s c h e r L . J . S . C . t o s u p p o r t h i s c o n c l u s i o n . In t h e l a t t e r c ase T a y l o r J . , w i t h o u t d i s c u s s i o n , assumed t h a t n o n - r e v e n u e p r o d u c i n g , c o m m e r c i a l p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by the husband b e f o r e m a r r i a g e was not a f a m i l y a s s e t . He d i d not make c l e a r whether he r e a c h e d t h i s c o n c l u s i o n b e c a u s e t h e p r o p e r t y had been a c q u i r e d b e f o r e m a r r i a g e o r b e c a u s e no r e v e n u e was a v a i l a b l e from t h e p r o p e r t y d u r i n g m a r r i a g e t o be used f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . 3 5 S u b s e q u e n t c a s e s were more s p e c i f i c . In Mayuk v Mayuk S p e n c e r L.J.S.C. h e l d t h a t the husband's p h o t o g r a p h i c equipment was not a f a m i l y 36 a s s e t . He e x p l a i n e d : "On t h e e v i d e n c e , i t was u s e d s o l e l y by t h e -47-husband as a hobby and w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n o f p r e p a r i n g h i m s e l f t o p u r s u e p h o t o g r a p h y as a b u s i n e s s . T h i s n e v e r happened". In S i m p k i n s v 3 7 S i m p k i n s a s i m i l a r l i n e was t a k e n . With r e g a r d t o the husband's 3 8 c o l l e c t i o n o f swords, S h e p p a r d L . J . S . C . n o t e d : " . . . t h e husband owns some swords, t h e c o l l e c t i o n o f w h i c h has been h i s p e r s o n a l hobby. T h e r e i s no s u g g e s t i o n t h a t any o t h e r member o f t h e f a m i l y i s i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s hobby. I h o l d t h a t t h i s c o l l e c t i o n i s n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t " . N e i t h e r o f t h e s e c a s e s c o n s i d e r e d the argument t h a t a hobby c o u l d , i n i t s e l f , be r e g a r d e d as be,i-ng_.a' f a m i l y p u r p o s e , nor does t h e argument a p p e a r t o have been made to the c o u r t . Y e t i f t h e p u r c h a s e o f a f u r j a c k e t i n Hauptman f o r t h e " c r e a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e o f harmony i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t " was r e g a r d e d as a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , i t i s s u b m i t t e d t h a t a s i m i l a r argument c o u l d be made f o r h o b b i e s . T h i s argument was, i n f a c t , a c c e p t e d 39 i n P ap i n e a u v P a p i n e au . In h o l d i n g h e r e t h a t t h e husband's stamp 40 c o l l e c t i o n was a f a m i l y a s s e t , E s s o n J . r e a s o n e d as f o l l o w s : In my v i e w , the s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f a hobby c a r r i e d on d u r i n g m a r r i a g e , even t h o u g h i t i s t h e hobby o f one spouse t o t h e v i r t u a l e x c l u s i o n o f t h e o t h e r , s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a f a m i l y a s s e t on t h e b a s i s t h a t t h e h o b b i e s o f e a c h p a r t n e r t o t h e m a r r i a g e - c a n f a i r l y be r e g a r d e d as a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . T h i s case i s the more c o m p e l l i n g b e c a u s e t h e h u s b and had been c o l l e c t i n g stamps s i n c e h i s y o u t h and had a c c u m u l a t e d th e b u l k o f h i s c o l l e c t i o n b e f o r e m a r r i a g e . T h e r e was e v i d e n c e , however, t h a t t h e w i f e had a s s i s t e d h e r husband somewhat by b r i n g i n g home stamps from work, though i t ' w a s e v i d e n t t h a t she h a d n o t c o n t r i b u t e d much t o t h e c o l l e c t i o n i n terms o f v a l u e . I t c o u l d have been' a r g u e d , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e hobby was n o t s o l e l y t h e i n t e r e s t o f t h e husband. M c L a c h l i n L . J . S . C . d i d n o t 41 see cause t o make such a d i s t i n c t i o n i n Hauptman v Hauptman , where he e x p r e s s l y a p p l i e d t h e r e a s o n i n g i n the ; P a p i n e a u case t o h o l d t h a t -48-p h o t o g r a p h i c equipment i n the p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e husband and u s e d s o l e l y by him as a hobby was a f a m i l y a s s e t . N e i t h e r Hauptman n o r P a p i ne au r e f e r r e d t o t h e e a r l i e r c a s e s o f Mayuk v Mayuk and 5 i m p k i n s v S i m p k i n s . T h e r e t h u s e x i s t two d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposed l i n e s o f a u t h o r i t y on t h i s q u e s t i o n , each o f e q u a l s t a n d i n g . 42 The l a t e s t case on t h i s t o p i c a p p e a r s t o be H o l l i n g e r v H a l l i n g e r Cowan L . J . S . C . h e r e i n t i m a t e d t h a t i n c o n s i d e r i n g w hether a hobby c o n s t i t u t e d a f a m i l y a s s e t , each case must depend on i t s own f a c t s . In t h i s c ase t h e husband's gun c o l l e c t i o n was h e l d t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t b e c a u s e , a l t h o u g h p r i m a r i l y t h e 'concern o f the husband, i t was d i s p l a y e d i n a c a s e o r c a b i n e t i n t h e home, and t o t h a t e x t e n t , was an o b j e c t o f ornament i n t h e f a m i l y home and t h e r e b y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . T h i s r e a s o n i n g seems t o i n d i c a t e a r e t u r n t o the Mayuk and S i m p k i n s l i n e o f a u t h o r i t y and shows once a g a i n t h e d i f f i c u l t y b e i n g e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e c o u r t s i n a t t e m p t i n g t o d e f i n e " f a m i l y p u r p o s e " ^ 3 . A r e l a t e d i s s u e ' i s the q u e s t i o n o f whether p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d a f t e r t h e s p o u s e s have s e p a r a t e d may be c l a s s i f i e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t . W h i l e t h e O n t a r i o l e g i s l a t i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e use o f a f a m i l y a s s e t t a k e p l a c e " w h i l e t h e s p o u s e s a r e r e s i d i n g t o g e t h e r " , t h e r e i s no s i m i l a r r e q u i r e m e n t i n the B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a l e g i s l a t i o n . T h e o r e t i c a l l y , t h e r e f o r e , i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a an a s s e t a c q u i r e d a f t e r a c o u p l e have s e p a r a t e d bv . one' s-pous'e and.tfiuae.d.jj'Jlij'y; . t h a t soou-s'e' and a mi.no.r c h i l d o f e i t h e r spouse f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e c o u l d be c l a s s i f i e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t . 43 T h i s would e x p l a i n t h e r e a s o n i n g i n Ban d i e r a v B a n d i e r a , one o f the e a r l y c a s e s on t h e s e c t i o n , a l t h o u g h t h e f a c t s a r e not e n t i r e l y i n p o i n t . The a s s e t i n d i s p u t e h e r e was the m a t r i m o n i a l home. T h i s home -49-h a d b e e n o c c u p i e d b y t h e s p o u s e s a n d t h e i r o n l y c h i l d d u r i n g t h e c o u r s e o f t h e m a r r i a g e . A f t e r s e p a r a t i o n , h o w e v e r , a n d b e f o r e t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , 1 9 7 8 , t h e . w i f e , b y s i g n i n g a . q u i t c l a i m d e e d , c o n v e y e d a l l h e r i n t e r e s t i n t h e m a t r i m o n i a l h o m e t o h e r h u s b a n d . T h e h o u s e w a s t h u s n o t f a c t u a l l y " n e w " p r o p e r t y , a l t h o u g h i t p r o b a b l y c a n b e l e g a l l y s o r e g a r d e d . S i n c e t h e s e p a r a t i o n t h e h u s b a n d , t h e c o u p l e ' c h i l d a n d a n o t h e r w o m a n h a d b e e n r e s i d i n g i n t h e m a t r i m o n i a l h o m e . W h e n t h e w i f e c l a i m e d a s h a r e i n t h e h o u s e t h e h u s b a n d a r g u e d t h a t t h e h o m e w a s n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t b e c a u s e a t t h e t i m e o f t h e n e w F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t c o m i n g i n t o f o r c e i t w a s b e i n g u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e b y t h e n e w f a m i l y , c o n s i s t i n g o f t h e h u s b a n d , c h i l d a n d a n o t h e r w o m a n , o f w h i c h t h e w i f e w a s n o t a m e m b e r . H y d e L . J . S . C . d e a l t w i t h t h i s a r g u m e n t a s f o l l o w s : 1 a m u n a b l e t o a g r e e w i t h •C. the h u s b a n d ' s c o u n s e l ' s ) r e a d i n g o f s . 4 5 ( 2 ) . I n . m y v i e w , i t i s q u i t e c l e a r f r o m t h e c l e a r w o r d i n g o f t h e s e c t i o n t h a t i f a n y o f e i t h e r ( 1 ) t h e h u s b a n d , ( 2 ) t h e w i f e , o r ( 3 ) t h e m i n o r c h i l d S e a n i s o r d i n a r i l y u s i n g t h e m a t r i m o n i a l h o m e f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , i . e . , a r e s i d e n c e , t h e n i t c o n s t i t u t e s a f a m i l y a s s e t a t t h e d a t e o f t h e d i s s o l u t i o n o f t h e m a r r i a g e i f i t i s t h e n o w n e d b y e i t h e r o r b o t h o f t h e s p o u s e s , w h a t e v e r m a y h a v e b e e n t h e s t a t e o f t h e t i t l e p r i o r t o t h e 3 1 s t . M a r c h , 1 9 7 9 . T h i s p r o p e r t y w a s ' b e i n g o r d i n a r i l y u s e d b y t h e h u s b a n d a n d t h e c h i l d a s a r e s i d e n c e a s o f t h e d a t e o f t h e d i v o r c e h e a r i n g a n d c o n s t i t u t e s a f a m i l y a s s e t a t t h a t d a t e . The d i f f i c u l t y w i t h t h i s a p p r o a c h , i t i s s u b m i t t e d , i s t h a t i t g i v e s t o o b r o a d an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t o the word " f a m i l y " . A more r e s t r i c t e d 4 5 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was a p p l i e d by C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . i n McLennan v McLennan As a l r e a d y n o t e d , C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . d e f i n e d f a m i l y p u r p o s e i n t h i s c a s e as "a p u r p o s e c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e whole f a m i l y , n o t m e r e l y one o r more i n d i v i d u a l s i n i t . W h i l e p r o p e r t y may a c t u a l l y be u s e d by o n l y one member o f t h e f a m i l y , the p u r p o s e f o r i t s use must be r e l a t e d t o t h e f a m i l y g r o u p , w h i c h c e a s e s t o e x i s t i n n o r m a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s w h e n s p o u s e s s e p a r a t e ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) " . H e q u i t e p r o p e r l y w e n t o n t o s a y -50-t h a t " i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g s e p a r a t i o n , p r o p e r t y may be used f o r a p u r p o s e c o n n e c t e d w i t h b o t h s e p a r a t e d p a r t s o f the f a m i l y , f o r example, t h e p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p u r c h a s e o f r e c r e a t i o n a l p r o p e r t y f o r use by t h e whole f a m i l y , though n o t n e c e s s a r i l y a t t h e same t i m e " . The n a r r o w e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f " f a m i l y " c e r t a i n l y a p p e a r s more l o g i c a l and i s , i t i s s u b m i t t e d , t h e b e t t e r a p p r o a c h . There i s s u p p o r t f o r t h i s 46 i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n o t h e r c a s e s . In Robertshaw v Robertshaw (No.2) the c o u r t h e l d t h a t p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p r o p e r t y was n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t . Fawcus J . c o n t e n t e d h i m s e l f w i t h h o l d i n g t h a t f u r n i t u r e a c q u i r e d by t h e w i f e a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n was n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t b e c a u s e i t had been used o n l y by h e r . W h i l e t h i s r e a s o n i n g i s ambiguous, i t i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the McLennan a p p r o a c h t h a t once a f a m i l y has s e p a r a t e d , p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by e i t h e r spouse w i l l n o t g e n e r a l l y be r e g a r d e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t u n l e s s i t i s u s e d by b o t h p a r t s o f t h e o r i g i n a l f a m i l y f o r a f a m i l y 47 p u r p o s e . L i k e w i s e i n B o l d i c k v B o 1 d i c k , f u r n i t u r e p u r c h a s e d by t h e husband and c a r s p u r c h a s e d by b o t h s p o u s e s a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n were h e l d not be f a m i l y a s s e t s w i t h o u t any e x p r e s s r e a s o n b e i n g g i v e n f o r t h i s c o n c l u s i o n . Once a g a i n , however, t h e McLennan r e a s o n i n g would a p p l y . ' I n ^ B r i t i s h Columbia"/ use by a m i n o r , J c h i I d .'of-, . e i t h e r spouse i s s u f f i c i e n t t o r e n d e r p r o p e r t y a f a m i l y a s s e t . T h i s may be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h t h e O n t a r i o d e f i n i t i o n , w h i c h r e q u i r e s use by t h e s p o u s e s " o r one o r more o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n " . I t would a p p e a r t h a t i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a use by a m i n o r c h i l d f r o m a p r e v i o u s m a r r i a g e o r r e l a t i o n s h i p o f one o f t h e s p o u s e s would be s u f f i c i e n t , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h a t t h e c h i l d has n e v e r been l e g a l l y a d o p t e d by t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . T h e r e have been no r e p o r t e d c a s e s on t h i s i s s u e as y e t , however. - 5 1 -The c a s e s on s . 4 5 ( 2 ) a r e c l e a r l y u n s a t i s f a c t o r y . Not o n l y i s t h e r e doubt as t o the p r e c i s e meaning o f the p h r a s e " o r d i n a r i l y used..,., f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e " , t h e r e a r e a l s o d i f f e r e n t l i n e s o f a u t h o r i t y r e g a r d i n g i t s meaning i n s i m i l a r f a c t s i t u a t i o n s . U n t i l some c l a r i f i c a t i i s r e c e i v e d from t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l o r the l e g i s l a t u r e , i t w i l l be i m p o s s i b l e t o p r e d i c t i n advance how a c o u r t w i l l c l a s s i f y c e r t a i n a s s e t s even where p r e v i o u s c a s e s have d e a l t w i t h s i m i l a r a s s e t s . ( i i ) P r o p e r t y s p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d e d The g e n e r a l d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s i n s . 4 5 ( 2 ) i s f o l l o w e d by s . 4 5 ( 3 ) , w h i c h s p e c i f i c a l l y i n c l u d e s f i v e c l a s s e s o f p r o p e r t y w i t h i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s . The f i r s t f o u r o f t h e s e c l a s s e s a r e d i s c u s s e d below. (A) S h a r e s i n a c o r p o r a t i o n o r an i n t e r e s t i n a t r u s t . S e c t i o n 4 5 ( 3 ) (a) p r o v i d e s t h a t where a c o r p o r a t i o n or t r u s t owns p r o p e r t y t h a t would be a f a m i l y a s s e t i f owned by a s p o u s e , a s h a r e i n t h e c o r p o r a t i o n or an i n t e r e s t i n the t r u s t owned by t h e spouse i s a f a m i l y a s s e t . The a p p a r e n t l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t i o n b e h i n d t h i s p r o v i s i o n i s t o p r e v e n t s p o u s e s from d e f e a t i n g t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e l e g i s l a t i o n by p l a c i n g the o w n e r s h i p o f p r o p e r t y i n t h e hands o f a c o r p o r a t i o n o r t r u s t c o n t r o l l e d by t h e s p o u s e . A s i m i l a r p r o v i s i o n 48 e x i s t s i n the O n t a r i o A c t . I t i s i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t the a s s e t i n q u e s t i o n must be u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e i n o r d e r to be c a u g h t by t h i s s e c t i o n . A mere s h a r e o r i n t e r e s t o f a spouse i n a c o r p o r a t i o n o r t r u s t t h a t '.owns b u s i n e s s a s s e t s w i l l n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y q u a l i f y . Thus -52-49 i n the O n t a r i o c a s e o f Bregman v Bregman the c o u r t h e l d t h a t a p a i n t i n g w hich was owned by the husband's c o r p o r a t i o n b u t d i s p l a y e d i n t h e f a m i l y home was a f a m i l y a s s e t . I f t h e p a i n t i n g had n o t been used by t h e f a m i l y b u t had i n s t e a d been d i s p l a y e d i n t h e husband's o f f i c e , i t w o u l d n o t have been so r e g a r d e d . In B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , u n l i k e O n t a r i o , i t i s the s h a r e i n the c o r p o r a t i o n o r t h e i n t e r e s t i n the t r u s t w hich becomes the f a m i l y a s s e t , and n o t t h e a s s e t i t s e l f . T h i s r a i s e s an i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n . I f o n l y some o f a c o r p o r a t i o n ' s ' p r o p e r t y i s u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e b u t t h e husband owns a l l . t h e s h a r e s i n t h e c o r p o r a t i o n , do a l l t h e s h a r e s become f a m i l y a s s e t s o r o n l y a p e r c e n t a g e o f them e q u a l t o t h e v a l u e o f t h e " f a m i l y " p r o p e r t y ? F o r example, a c a r v a l u e d a t #20 vOOO, o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , . i s owned by a c o r p o r a t i o n i n w h i c h t h e h u s b and owns a l l 100 s h a r e s and the c o r p o r a t i o n has a n e t w o r t h o f #200,000'. Do a l l t h e s h a r e s become f a m i l y a s s e t s o r o n l y t e n o f them (the p r o p o r t i o n a t e v a l u e ) ? The l a t t e r view i s t h e more l o g i c a l . T h i s view may be s u p p o r t e d by p o i n t i n g out t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t i o n uses t h e words "a s h a r e " i n a c o r p o r a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n " a l l t h e s h a r e s " . S i m i l a r l y , i t r e f e r s t o "an i n t e r e s t " r a t h e r t h a n "the i n t e r e s t " i n a t r u s t . Even i f t h e c o u r t s d i d n o t adopt t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , however, the owner o f t h e s h a r e or i n t e r e s t c o u l d a p p l y f o r j u d i c i a l r e a p p o r t i o n m e n t p u r s u a n t t o s.51. T h e r e have been no r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n s on t h i s p o i n t as y e t and i t i s - u n c l e a r what l i n e t h e c o u r t s w i l l choose t o f o l l o w . (B() P r o p e r t y o v e r w h i c h a spouse can e x e r c i s e a power o f a p p o i n t m e n t . Under s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( b ) ( i ) , i f a spouse has a power o f a p p o i n t m e n t -53-e x e r c i s a b l e i n f a v o u r o f h i m s e l f w i t h r e s p e c t t o p r o p e r t y w h i c h would be a f a m i l y a s s e t under t h e g e n e r a l d e f i n i t i o n , such p r o p e r t y i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t . Once a g a i n , t h e p r o p e r t y must be u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e i n o r d e r t o q u a l i f y under t h i s head. (Bi ) P r o p e r t y c o n d i t i o n a l l y d i s p o s e d o f by a s p o u s e . Where p r o p e r t y would be a f a m i l y a s s e t i f owned by a spouse b u t the spouse has d i s p o s e d o f the p r o p e r t y s u b j e c t t o a power t o r e v o k e t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o r a power t o use or c o n t r o l t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y , t h e p r o p e r t y w i l l be r e g a r d e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t i n w h i c h the o t h e r spouse i s e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e ^ ° . As w i t h s s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( a ) and ( b ) ( i ) , t h i s p r o v i s i o n has r e c e i v e d no a t t e n t i o n from the c o u r t s t o d a t e . (C) Money i n a s a v i n g s i n s t i t u t i o n a c c o u n t . I f an a c c o u n t i n a s a v i n g s i n s t i t u t i o n i s o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , t h e n by v i r t u e o f s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( c ) , i t i s deemed t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t . 51 In B i d m ak v B i d r i i ak t h e c o u r t r e f u s e d t o c l a s s i f y as a f a m i l y a s s e t money p l a c e d on d e p o s i t by t h e . h u s b a n d out o f h i s s a l a r y and #10,668.36 from a j o i n t s a v i n g s a c c o u n t . T h i s d e c i s i o n was r e a c h e d n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e f a c t t h a t t h e j o i n t s a v i n g s a c c o u n t was h e l d t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t . The r e a s o n i n g b e h i n d t h e case seems t o be t h a t t h e money on d e p o s i t was not " u s e d " . I t . t h e r e f o r e d i d n o t comply with/'-.the r e q u i r e m e n t o f s.45(2) t h a t i t be u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . -54-52 A j o i n t s a v i n g s a c c o u n t was a l s o d i s c u s s e d i n Rus se11 v Rus s e l l , where i t was h e l d t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t . The name i n wh i c h an a c c o u n t i s h e l d and t h e s i g n i n g a u t h o r i t y f o r t h e a c c o u n t a r e . i r r e l e v a n t , however. The o n l y p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r such an a c c o u n t t o be c l a s s i f i e d as a f a m i l y a s s e t i s t h a t t h e a c c o u n t be w i t h a s a v i n g s i n s t i t u t i o n and t h a t i t be o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . I t may be q u e s t i o n e d , i n f a c t , w h e ther i t was n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( c ) as a s e p a r a t e head a t a l l . I t wo u l d a p p e a r t h a t s.45(2) w o u l d i n any e v e n t o p e r a t e so as t o i n c l u d e money i n an a c c o u n t which was used f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . (D) R i g h t s under a n n u i t i e s , p e n s i o n s , home o w n e r s h i p or r e t i r e m e n t s a v i n g s p l a n s . S e c t i o n 45(d) i n c l u d e s as a.'rfamily a s s e t a r i g h t of a spouse under an a n n u i t y o r p e n s i o n , home o w n e r s h i p o r r e t i r e m e n t s a v i n g s p l a n . The s e c t i o n does n o t s p e c i f y , t h a t such p e n s i o n , or p l a n must be u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . T h i s f a c t was i n t e r p r e t e d by t h e c o u r t i n Murray y Murray as e v i d e n c e t h a t p e n s i o n s were f a m i l y a s s e t s by d e f i n i t i o n and t h a t no "use" had t o be p r o v e n w i t h r e g a r d e x p r e s s e d s u c c i n t l y by C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . i n r e j e c t i n g t h e husband's p l e a t h a t s u c h use I have d i f f i c u l t y c o n c e i v i n g how a r e t i r e m e n t s a v i n g s p l a n c o u l d be used f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e w h i l e i t r e m a i n s a s a v i n g s p l a n . Once c a s h e d t h e p r o c e e d s may be so used, b u t t h e n the s a v i n g s p l a n no l o n g e r e x i s t s . I p o i n t o u t t h a t i f t h e a s s e t d e s c r i b e d i n s u b s . ( 3 ) ( c ) were a l s o s u b j e c t t o the g e n e r a l words i n s u b s . ( 2 ) t h e r e would be no need f o r t h e i r e x p r e s s i n c l u s i o n i n s u b s . (3) (c) . T h i s l i n e has been f o l l o w e d i n i s now f i r m l y , e s t a b l i s h e d ' . In Mayuk: v t o same. The r e a s o n i n g was 5 4 Bateman v Bateman , i n w 54a must be p r o v e n : numerous s u b s e q u e n t c a s e s and 55 Mayuk S p e n c e r L . J . S . C . p o i n t e d -55-o u t the l o g i c a l c o n c l u s i o n ' o f t h i s a p p r o a c h . I t has a l r e a d y been n o t e d t h a t i n g e n e r a l t h e c o u r t s a r e r e l u c t a n t t o c l a s s i f y p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p r o p e r t y as f a m i l y a s s e t s , as t h e y w i l l not n o r m a l l y have been used f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . In Mayuk the w i f e had a c q u i r e d two p e n s i o n p l a n s s i n c e s e p a r a t i o n o u t o f h e r p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n s a l a r y . S p e n c e r L . J . S . C . n o t e d t h a t : " ^ " ( t h e ) f a c t t h a t she has c r e a t e d b o t h p l a n s a f t e r t h e s e p a r a t i o n and from wages e a r n e d s i n c e t h e n does n o t a s s i s t h e r s i n c e , s t r a n g e l y , t h e w o r d i n g o f s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( d ) makes n o . r e f e r e n c e t o when the p l a n i s c r e a t e d . I t i s a f a m i l y a s s e t s i m p l y b e c a u s e i t i s t h e r e and b e c a u s e i t i s owned by a s p o u s e " . In t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , however, he r e a p p o r t i o n e d the p l a n s p u r s u a n t t o s.51 so t h a t t h e y v e s t e d e n t i r e l y i n t h e w i f e upon payment by h e r t o h e r h u s b a n d o f #1 each f o r h i s i n t e r e s t i n e ach o f them. More w i l l be s a i d l a t e r on t h e complex i s s u e s o f d i v i s i o n and v a l u a t i o n o f p e n s i o n s . F o r the moment i t may be n o t e d t h a t p e n s i o n p l a n s a r e not i n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f t h e O n t a r i o l e g i s l a t i o n . I n d e e d 5 7 t h e O n t a r i o C o u r t o f A p p e a l i n S t . G e r m a i n v S t . G e r m a i n has h e l d t h a t , i n g e n e r a l , p e n s i o n p l a n s do n o t c o n s t i t u t e f a m i l y a s s e t s . ( i i i ) B u s i n e s s a s s e t s and j o i n t v e n t u r e s . A l t h o u g h t h e s e a s s e t s a r e d e a l t w i t h i n s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n s o f t h e 58 l e g i s l a t i o n , i t i s c o n v e n i e n t t o d i s c u s s them t o g e t h e r as t h e y b o t h i n v o l v e the c o n v e r s i o n o f " n o n - f a m i l y a s s e t s " owned by one spouse i n t o f a m i l y a s s e t s by v i r t u e o f a d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n made by the o t h e r s p o u s e . S e c t i o n 45(3) (e) p r o v i d e s t h a t any r i g h t , s h a r e o r i n t e r e s t o f a spouse i n a v e n t u r e t o w h i c h money o r money's w o r t h has been c o n t r i b u t e d by o r on b e h a l f o f the' o t h e r spouse i s a f a m i l y a s s e t . -56-S e c t i o n 46 i s fram e d i n e x c l u s i o n a r y t e r m s . I t e x c l u d e s f r o m t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s p r o p e r t y w h i c h i s u s e d f o r b u s i n e s s p u r p o s e s and f u l f i l l s t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f s.46. F i r s t , t h e p r o p e r t y must be owned by t h e b u s i n e s s spouse t o the e x c l u s i o n o f the o t h e r s p o u s e . S e c o n d , t h e p r o p e r t y must be use d " p r i m a r i l y " f o r b u s i n e s s p u r p o s e s . T h i r d , and most i m p o r t a n t l y , the n o n - b u s i n e s s spouse must n o t have made any d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o e i t h e r the a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y i n q u e s t i o n o r t o t h e o p e r a t i o n o f the b u s i n e s s . A d i s c u s s i o n o f s.45(3) (e) i n v o l v e s b o t h t h e i s s u e o f " c o n t r i b u t i o n " and an a n a l y s i s o f t h e scope g i v e n t o t h e te r m " v e n t u r e " . A l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s e c t i o n would a p p e a r t o i n c l u d e any f a m i l y -o p e r a t e d b u s i n e s s t o w h i c h b o t h s p o u s e s had c o n t r i b u t e d . In p r a c t i c e , t h e c o u r t s have been v e r y l i b e r a l i n t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f what q u a l i f i e s 59 as a " v e n t u r e " . In Robertshaw v Robertshaw , one o f t h e e a r l i e s t c a s e s 60 d e c i d e d on t h i s s e c t i o n , Fawcus J . c o n c l u d e d as f o l l o w s : . . . I t h i n k t h e word " v e n t u r e " , whose o r d i n a r y meaning might w e l l e x c l u d e many b u s i n e s s e s , as us e d i n s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( e ) must be i n t e r p r e t e d so as t o i n c l u d e any b u s i n e s s . A c c o r d i n g l y he h e l d t h a t t h e husband's m e d i c a l p r a c t i c e f e l l u nder t h i s h e a d . The c o u r t a l s o h e l d t h a t l e a s i n g and managing an u p s t a i r s s u i t e was a j o i n t v e n t u r e . The i s s u e o f whether a m e d i c a l p r a c t i c e may be c o n s i d e r e d a v e n t u r e under t h i s s e c t i o n has a r i s e n i n many c a s e s . In J a c k h v J a c k h ^ E s s o n J . e x p r e s s l y f o l l o w e d t h e Robertshaw d e c i s i o n i n t h i s r e g a r d . He a l s o h e l d t h a t a c o u r t was e n t i t l e d t o g i v e a spouse an i n t e r e s t i n a m e d i c a l p r a c t i c e even where t h a t spouse was not a member o f t h e -57-C o l l e g e o f P h y s i c i a n s and S u r g e o n s , h a v i n g c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h i s c o u r s e o f a c t i o n was n o t p r o h i b i t e d under t h e M e d i c a l P r a c t i c l o n e r s A c t 6 2 . The i s s u e o f whether a law p r a c t i c e c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a G 3 f a m i l y a s s e t under t h i s head a r o s e i n P i t e r s v P i t e r s . The c o u r t h e l d t h a t a law p r a c t i c e c o u l d n o t be c o n s i d e r e d a f a m i l y a s s e t b e c a u s e o f 64 the p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e B a r r i s t e r s arid S o l i c i t o r s A c t , which p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e p r a c t i c e o f law can o n l y be c a r r i e d on by a member o f t h e Law S o c i e t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . The c o u r t was c a r e f u l t o r e s t r i c t i t s d e c i s i o n t o t h e a c t u a l law p r a c t i c e , l e a v i n g open t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t s h a r e s i n a h o l d i n g company us e d t o own t h e p h y s i c a l a s s e t s o f a law p r a c t i c e c o u l d be r e g a r d e d as Even s o , the d e c i s i o n was n o t n o t e d : I s h o u l d m e n t i o n t h a t I have n o t d e a l t w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n o f wh e t h e r t h e husband's i n t e r e s t i n t h r e e law p a r t n e r s h i p s can be c o n s i d e r e d as f a m i l y a s s e t s . T h i s m a t t e r came b e f o r e Locke J . on a p o i n t o f law b e f o r e t h e t r i a l . He h e l d i n w r i t t e n r e a s o n s t h a t t h e husband's i n t e r e s t i n law p a r t n e r s h i p s i s n o t c a p a b l e o f b e i n g a f a m i l y a s s e t w i t h i n . t h e meaning o f t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t . In so d e c i d i n g he f e l t bound by, a l t h o u g h he d i d n o t a g r e e w i t h , an e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n o f H i s L o r d s h i p Judge Wetmore L . J . S . C . i n the case o f P i t e r s v P i t e r s . f a m i l y a s s e t s i n a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , p o p u l a r . In L a d n e r v L a d n e r 6 5 , McKay J . S i m i l a r d i s q u i e t was e x p r e s s e d by S h e p p a r d L . J . S . C . i n U n d e r h i l l \ G 7 U n d e r h i l l . He d i d h o l d , however, t h a t P i t e r s d i d n o t p r e v e n t t h e c o u r t from a w a r d i n g t h e spouse an i n t e r e s t i n a h o l d i n g company w h i c h owned a s s e t s b e l o n g i n g t o t h e law p r a c t i c e . S h e p p a r d L . J . S . C . s t a t e d , 68 f i r m l y : C l e a r l y t h e s h a r e s i n A l b i o n a r e a b u s i n e s s a s s e t . C l e a r l y t h e p e t i t i o n e r ( w i f e ) made d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e i r a c q u i s i t i o n by s i g n i n g the mortgage on t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home (which p r o v i d e d t h e money f o r t h e i r i n i t i a l p u r c h a s e ) and i n managing t h e h o u s e h o l d . In my vi e w , under t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , the r a t i o n a l e o f t h e d e c i s i o n i n t h e P i t e j r s and L a d n e r c a s e s -58-sho'uld be c o n f i n e d t o law p a r t n e r s h i p s and n o t be e x t e n d e d t o companies w h i c h do n o t p r a c t i c e law... A l t h o u g h i t may n o t be p o s s i b l e t o award a spouse an i n t e r e s t i n a law p r a c t i c e i f she does n o t have l e g a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , i t i s u n c l e a r why t h e c o u r t i n P i t e r s d i d not c o n s i d e r o f f e r i n g the w i f e s ome 69 c o m p e n s a t i o n i n s t e a d o f such an i n t e r e s t . As w i t h I n d i a n l a n d o r 6 9a p r o p e r t y h e l d by t h e d i r e c t o r o f t h e V e t e r a n s ' Land A c t , a l t h o u g h t h e " r e s " c a n n o t be a t t a c h e d , c o m p e n s a t i o n c o u l d be o r d e r e d i n a p p r o p r i a t e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . A l t e r n a t i v e l y t h e c o u r t c o u l d o r d e r t h a t the r e m a i n i n g a s s e t s be d i v i d e d u n e q u a l l y . T h e r e seems no l o g i c a l r e a s o n why a d o c t o r ' s p r a c t i c e and a d e n t i s t ' s p r a c t i c e ^ ^ c a n be a t t a c h e d , b u t n o t a l a w y e r ' s . The t e r m " v e n t u r e " i s n o t r e s t r i c t e d t o b u s i n e s s v e n t u r e s and 70 has on o c c a s i o n been h e l d t o i n c l u d e p o r t f o l i o s o f f a m i l y i n v e s t m e n t s , 71 In Russe11 v Russe11 the c o u r t h e l d t h a t c e r t a i n m i n i n g s h a r e s and o t h e r b u s i n e s s i n t e r e s t s were j o i n t v e n t u r e s . The s h a r e s h a d been p u r c h a s e d by t h e h u s b and f o r the s p o u s e s ' mutual economic enhancement w i t h f u n d s drawn from a j o i n t s a v i n g s bank a c c o u n t or the husband's a c c o u n t , which was r e g a r d e d as an e x t e n s i o n o f t h e s a v i n g s a c c o u n t . In 72 S i n c l a i r v S i n c l a i r the c o u r t h e l d t h a t the p u r c h a s e by t h e h u s b and o f a condominium i n A l b e r t a as a t a x - s h e l t e r c o n s t i t u t e d a v e n t u r e w i t h i n s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( e ) as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o P r o v e n z a n o L . J . S . C . ' s f i n d i n g t h a t i t was a f a m i l y a s s e t under s.45(2) . P e r h a p s one o f the more i n t e r e s t i n g 73 f a m i l y a s s e t s , so f o u n d , has been an e d u c a t i o n . In W o l v e r t o n v W o l v e r t o n T r a i n o r J . , i n t h e c o u r s e o f d e a l i n g w i t h t h e d i v i s i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s 7 4 under the F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , s t a t e d : I s h o u l d m e n t i o n h e r e t h a t one o f t h e t h i n g s of. v a l u e a c q u i r e d by t h e w i f e d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e which i s a r e a l a s s e t t o h e r and o f no w o r t h t o h e r h u s b and i s h e r e d u c a t i o n i n t h e F i n e - 5 9 -A r t s . T h a t e d u c a t i o n c o u p l e d w i t h the o p p u r t u n i t i e s she had to t r a v e l , e q u i p h e r to p a r t i c i p a t e i n many v e n t u r e s n ot o t h e r w i s e p o s s i b l e . In my view t h i s i s no l e s s a f a m i l y a s s e t t h a n the d e n t a l p r a c t i c e o f the husband. O b v i o u s l y t h e husband h e r e c o u l d n o t be awarded a s h a r e i n h i s w i f e ' s e d u c a t i o n . I t s v a l u e was, however, c o n s i d e r e d i n p e r s u a d i n g t h e c o u r t t o award an u n e q u a l d i v i s i o n of a s s e t s . As s u g g e s t e d e a r l i e r , t h e r e seems no r e a s o n why a s i m i l a r a p p r o a c h s h o u l d n o t be a d o p t e d when d e a l i n g w i t h a law p r a c t i c e . A more complex q u e s t i o n , and one which has c a u s e d much l i t i g a t i o n , i s t he q u e s t i o n o f what c o n s t i t u t e s "a d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n " by a spouse so as t o r e n d e r a b u s i n e s s a s s e t a f a m i l y a s s e t u nder s s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( e ) o r 4 6 . D i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n s a r e r e l a t i v e l y e a s y t o e s t a b l i s h . N e v e r t h e l e s s i t seems t h a t n o t e v e r y c o n t r i b u t i o n , no m a t t e r how d i r e c t , w i l l be s u f f i c i e n t . I f a c o u r t c o n s i d e r s t h a t a w i f e has a l r e a d y been more t h a n a d e q u a t e l y compensated f o r h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n and t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n has been s m a l l , t h e p r o p e r t y may n o t be c o n s i d e r e d a f a m i l y a s s e t . An 7 5 example o f t h i s may be seen i n Andrew v An drew . The c o u r t f o u n d h e r e t h a t t h e w i f e had worked f o r a p p r o x i m a t l e y t e n weeks i n h e r husband's m e d i c a l p r a c t i c e and t h a t the work was not d i f f i c u l t . In t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i t was h e l d t h a t t h e w i f e had n o t p r o v e n a c o n t r i b u t i o n s u f f i c i e n t to j u s t i f y a f i n d i n g t h a t the p r a c t i c e was a f a m i l y a s s e t . On the o t h e r hand i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e s p o u s a l c o n t r i b u t i o n n e e d n o t be s u b s t a n t i a l . 76 In Robertshaw v Robertshaw an argument was made t h a t t h e w i f e s h o u l d not be c o n s i d e r e d t o have made a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o h e r husband's m e d i c a l p r a c t i c e as she had made such c o n t r i b u t i o n as an employee and had been 79 p a i d f o r h e r work. Fawcus J . r e j e c t e d t h i s argument: ...the f a c t t h a t she was p a i d f o r h e r work, whether r e a s o n a b l y -60-w e l l p a i d o r o t h e r w i s e , i s , i t seems t o me, i r r e l e v a n t . The f a c t i s , and I so f i n d , t h a t she d i d make a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the o p e r a t i o n o f t h e b u s i n e s s . . . . I f i n d n o t h i n g i n t h e w o r d i n g o f s.45(3) (e) o r s . 4 6 ( l ) o f t h e A c t wh i c h i n d i c a t e s j a n y i n t e n t i o n on t h e p a r t o f t h e l e g i s l a t u r e t h a t h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n s h o u l d n o t be c o n s i d e r e d m e r e l y b e c a u s e i t was made by h e r as an employee. 78 In F e n n i n g s v F e n n i n g s t h e w i f e had a l s o been p a i d f o r h e r work, t h i s t i m e i n h e r husband's m i l l i n g company. She was n e v e r t h e l e s s f o u n d to have made a d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n and t h e company was h e l d t o be a f a m i l y a s s e t . Where money has been c o n t r i b u t e d to a b u s i n e s s , t h a t w i l l o. o b v i o u s l y be r e g a r d e d as a d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n . O t h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n s have i n c l u d e d the use o f a w i f e ' s e q u i t y i n t h e f a m i l y home, a l b e i t w i t h o u t 79 c o s t t o h e r and f o r b r i e f p e r i o d s o f time . A d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n can a l s o be made so as to c o n v e r t p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n b u s i n e s s a s s e t s i n t o f a m i l y 80 a s s e t s . So i n J o h n s o n v J o h n s o n the husband had made i n v e s t m e n t s a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n by b o r r o w i n g from t h e bank. The e v i d e n c e e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t Mrs. J o h n s o n c o n t r i b u t e d t o h e r husband's c r e d i t a t t h e bank and i n d e e d t h a t he had a s k e d h e r n o t t o t e l l t h e bank o f t h e s e p a r a t i o n l e s t i t j e o p a r d i s e h i s c r e d i t p o s i t i o n . Thua 'the' c o n n e c t i o n between t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e a s s e t s and Mrs. J o h n s o n was e s t a b l i s h e d and t h e y were h e l d t o be f a m i l y a s s e t s . I t i s u n c l e a r w hether e v e r y p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n c o n t r i b u t i o n w o u l d be so r e g a r d e d . I f , f o r example, t h e p a r t i e s s e p a r a t e d and t h e w i f e t h e n s t a r t e d t o work f o r t h e husband's company f o r t h r e e y e a r s p r i o r t o t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r d i v o r c e and d i v i s i o n o f p r o p e r t y , would she be e n t i t l e d t o a s h a r e i n t h e b u s i n e s s a s s e t s a c c u m u l a t e d s i n c e t h e s e p a r a t i o n ? A l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s e c t i o n w o u l d s u g g e s t t h a t s uch a c o u r s e i s open t o h e r . On t h e o t h e r hand i t c o u l d be a r g u e d t h a t -61-t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n w a s m a d e s t r i c t l y q u a e m p l o y e e a n d n o t q u a w i f e . T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s r a t h e r n i c e a n d w a s n o t a c c e p t e d i n r e g a r d t o a s s e t s a c q u i r e d a n d c o n t r i b u t i o n s m a d e d u r i n g m a r r i a g e - i n R o b e r t s h a w . T h e p r e c i s e p o i n t h a s y e t t o c o m e b e f o r e t h e c o u r t s a n d i t i s u n c l e a r h o w t h e y w o u l d r e s p o n d . T h e q u e s t i o n o f w h a t a m o u n t s t o a n i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n b y a s p o u s e p r e s e n t s e v e n m o r e d i f f i c u l t y . T h e t e r m " i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n " i s d e f i n e d i n s . 4 6 ( 2 ) a n d i n c l u d e s " s a v i n g s t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t o f h o u s e h o l d o r . ' c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s b y t h e s p o u s e w h o h o l d s n o i n t e r e s t i n t h e p r o p e r t y " . One.iof t h e f i r s t i s s u e s t o a r i s e b e f o r e t h e c o u r t s i n t h i s r e g a r d w a s w h e t h e r s u c h " s a v i n g s " h a d t o b e p r o v e n o r 81 w h e t h e r t h e y c o u l d b e i n f e r r e d . I n F e n n i n g s v F e n n i n g s t h e r e s p o n d e n t h u s b a n d a r g u e d t h a t " s a v i n g s " c o u l d n o t b e p r e s u m e d t o f l o w f r o m " e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t " a n d t h a t t h e w i f e h a d n o t p r o v e n a c t u a l s a v i n g s . C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . n e v e r t h e l e s s i n f e r r e d t h a t ^ t h e w i f e d i d m a k e s a v i n g s t h r o u g h h e r e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e h o u s e h o l d a n d c i t e d e x a m p l e s o f w h e r e t h e w i f e h a d m a d e c l o t h e s f o r t h e h u s b a n d ' s d a u g h t e r . M o r e 8 2 s p e c i f i c e v i d e n c e o f s a v i n g s w a s t e n d e r e d i n S i n c l a i r v S i n c l a i r , w h e r e t h e w i f e w a s a b l e t o a c c o u n t f o r m o n t h l y h o u s e h o l d e x p e n d i t u r e o v e r 8 3 p a s t p e r i o d s . I n L i t t l e w o o d v L i t t l e w o o d W e t m o r e L . J . S . C . s u g g e s t e d t h a t s . 4 6 ( 2 ) i n v o l v e d t w o s e p a r a t e t e s t s ; t h a t " s a v i n g s t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t " i s o n e t e s t a n d a c o n t r i b u t i o n t h r o u g h c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a n o t h e r . I n t h i s i n s t a n c e t h e r e w a s n o f a c t u a l e v i d e n c e o f s a v i n g s t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t . T h e w i f e h a d , h o w e v e r , a s s u m e d t h e e n t i r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r r a i s i n g t h e c h i l d r e n o v e r a p e r i o d o f t w o y e a r s w h i l e t h e h u s b a n d d e v o t e d h i m s e l f t o h i s b u s i n e s s a n d t h i s w a s h e l d t o s a t i s f y t h e s e c o n d p a r t o f t h e t e s t , b e i n g m o r e t h a n t h e - 6 2 -" n o r m a l c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " . T h e c o u r t l e f t o p e n t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r n o r m a l c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w o u l d b e I n S i m p k i n s v t h e o r d i n a r y ' w a s r e q u i r e d o f a w i f e i n t h i s r e g a r d a g a i n c a m e u p f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n . 85 S h e p p a r d L . J . S . C . n o t e d : I a m u r g e d b y c o u n s e l f o r t h e h u s b a n d t o f i n d t h a t t h e r e w a s n o i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n b y t h e w i f e ( t o t h e h u s b a n d ' s b u s i n e s s ) b e c a u s e s h e h a d n o t p r o d u c e d p r o o f o f " s a v i n g s t h r o u g h e f f e c t i v e m a n a g e m e n t o f h o u s e h o l d o r c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " . T h a t i s t o s a y , i f I u n d e r s t a n d c o u n s e l c o r r e c t l y , t h a t t h e w i f e h a d n o t s h o w n , f o r e x a m p l e , t h a t s h e h a d o p e n e d a b a n k a c c o u n t a n d p e r i o d i c a l l y d e p o s i t e d s a v i n g s f r o m h e r h o u s e h o l d b u d g e t w h i c h w e r e t h e n h e l d t h r o u g h o u t t h e m a r r i a g e o r m a d e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e h u s b a n d f o r i n v e s t m e n t i n t h e b u s i n e s s . I n d e e d , c o u n s e l w e n t e v e n f u r t h e r a n d u r g e d me t o f i n d t h a t f a r f r o m e s t a b l i s h i n g a n y s a v i n g s t h e w i f e w a s a s p e n d t h r i f t w h o w a s c o n t i n u a l l y u r g i n g h e r - h u s b a n d t o s p e n d m o r e o n f o o l i s h l u x u r i e s . W i t h r e s p e c t , I r e j e c t t h a t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f , s . 4 6 ( 2 ) . W h e r e a w i f e , a s i n t h i s c a s e , h a s c a r r i e d o u t h o u s e h o l d a n d c h i l d -r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e ( i n t h i s c a s e s o m e t h i r t e e n y e a r s ) I t h i n k i t i s t o b e i n f e r r e d t h a t t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s w e r e p e r f o r m e d e f f e c t i v e l y a n d i n a m a n n e r t o p r o d u c e s a v i n g s f o r t h e f a m i l y u n l e s s e v i d e n c e i s l e d t o t h e c o n t r a r y . H e r e t h e r e h a s b e e n n o e v i d e n c e t h a t t h r o u g h s u b s t a n t i a l p e r i o d s o f t h e m a r r i a g e t h e h u s b a n d h a s b e e n f o r c e d t o e m p l o y o t h e r p e o p l e t o c a r r y o u t t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s b e c a u s e o f t h e i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o r s l o t h o f t h e w i f e . T h i s r e a s o n i n g , i f c o r r e c t , r e v e r s e s t h e b u r d e n o f p r o o f i n t h e s e c a s e s t o a s u b s t a n t i a l d e g r e e . T h e o n u s w o u l d no l o n g e r b e on t h e w i f e t o p r o v e s h e made e f f e c t i v e s a v i n g s b u t on t h e h u s b a n d t o p r o v e s h e d i d 8 6 n o t . I n J o h n s on v J o h n s o n , h o w e v e r , T a y l o r J . r e j e c t e d t h i s i d e a a n d h e l d t h a t " t h e o n u s m u s t b e o n t h e w i f e t o s a t i s f y t h e c o u r t t h a t h e r s t e w a r d s h i p o f t h e h o u s e h o l d f u n d s was p r u d e n t a n d r e s u l t e d i n b u s i n e s s 8 7 a s s e t s b e i n g a c c u m u l a t e d " . . T h i s m a r k s a s u b s t a n t i a l r e t r e a t f r o m t h e S i m p k i n s c a s e . I t i s t h u s s t i l l u n c l e a r w h a t d e g r e e o f s a v i n g s o r e f f o r f e m u s t b e p r o v e n t o s a t i s f y s . 4 6 ( 2 ) . I t s e e m s p r o b a b l e t h a t i n s u f f i c i e n t t o c o n s t i t u t e a n i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n . 8 4 S i m p k i n s t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r s o m e t h i n g o u t o f -63-most i n s t a n c e s t h e r e w i l l have t o be s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e o f i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s on the p a r t o f the spouse r e l y i n g on s.46(2) b e f o r e t h e c o u r t w i l l be s a t i s f i e d t h a t no s a v i n g s c o u l d have been made. In J o h n s o n v J o h n s o n the e v i d e n c e was t h a t the w i f e had m i s a p p r o p r i a t e d h o u s e h o l d f u n d s w h i c h she had then used f o r g a m b l i n g . In t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s i t i s n o t s u p r i s i n g t h a t t h e c o u r t w o u l d not i n f e r t h a t any p e c u n i a r y a d v a n t a g e had a c c r u e d t o the husband from h e r management o f h o u s e h o l d and c h i l d -r e a r i n g f a c i l i t i e s . In a n y t h i n g o t h e r than extreme c a s e s , however, a c t u a l s a v i n g s w i l l be e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t to p r o v e . As a m a t t e r o f p r a c t i c a l i t y , a c c o r d i n g l y , i t may be n e c e s s a r y f o r the c o u r t t o i n f e r s u c h s a v i n g s i n n o r m a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . An even more v e x e d q u e s t i o n i s w h e t h e r p r o o f o f s a v i n g s t h r o u g h management o f h o u s e h o l d o r c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i s o f i t s e l f s u f f i c i e n t t o e s t a b l i s h an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n . T h e r e a r e two g e n e r a l l i n e s o f a u t h o r i t y on t h i s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . They r a i s e t h e i s s u e o f w h e t h e r an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n f r o m a w i f e ' s e f f e c t i v e management o f h o u s e h o l d o r c h i 1 d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i s t o be assumed o r w h e t h e r she must p r o v e t h a t t h e y r e s u l t e d i n a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o h e r h u s b a n d ' s p r o p e r t y o r v e n t u r e . I n t h e e a r l i e r c a s e s t h e r e was o f t e n e v i d e n c e o f b o t h d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n and a c o n t r i b u t i o n w h i c h may have f a l l e n u n d e r 8 8 s . 4 6 ( 2 ) , so t h e m a t t e r was n e v e r d i s c u s s e d i n d e t a i l . I n S amue1s v 89 Samuels , h o w e v e r , C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . h e l d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e w i f e h a d made a c o n t r i b u t i o n as a w i f e and m o t h e r , t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n d i d n o t have t h e n e c e s s a r y c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e p r o p e r t y i n w h i c h she c l a i m e d an i n t e r e s t . 9 0 He e x p l a i n e d : What I t h i n k t h e w i f e must p r o v e i s t h a t h e r c o n t r i b u t i o n h a d some c o n n e c t i o n , a l b e i t i n o n l y a g e n e r a l way, w i t h t h e p r o p e r t y i n w h i c h she s e e k s an i n t e r e s t . T h a t some c o n n e c t i o n i s r e q u i r e d seems c l e a r f r o m s . 4 6 ( l ) w h i c h e x c l u d e s b u s i n e s s a s s e t s w h e r e - 6 4 -t h e non-owning spouse makes no c o n t r i b u t i o n t o "the a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y " o r " o p e r a t i o n o f t h e b u s i n e s s " . . . T h i s seems a l s o the s e n s e o f s . 4 5 ( 3 ) (e) which c o n s t i t u t e s as a f a m i l y a s s e t a s p o u s e ' s i n t e r e s t i n a v e n t u r e " t o w h i c h money o r money's worth was c o n t r i b u t e d by t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . . . " Assuming t h e w i f e has p r o v e d h e r " e f f e c t i v e management" as d e s c r i b e d i n s . 4 6 ( 2 ) , t h e r e i s no e v i d e n c e t h a t such management c o n t r i b u t e d i n any way t o t h e o p e r a t i o n o f the S askatchewan p r o p e r t i e s . By such management she d i d n o t f r e e h e r husband t o d e a l w i t h them, as t h e y were managed by h i s b r o t h e r and n o t by him. To f i n d t h i s a s s e t a f a m i l y a s s e t i t w o uld, I t h i n k , be n e c e s s a r y t o h o l d t h a t b u s i n e s s o r v e n t u r e a s s e t s a r e f a m i l y a s s e t s whenever a non-owning spouse shows s i m p l y t h a t she has been a good w i f e and mother w i t h o u t any need t o p r o v e a l i n k between t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f the w i f e and t h e a s s e t . i n q u e s t i o n . I do n o t c o n s t r u e s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( e ) and s . 4 6 i n t h i s way. In t h e o r d i n a r y case i t may n o t be a t a l l d i f f i c u l t f o r a w i f e t o show h e r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n , v i a s . 4 6 ( 2 ) , t o h e r husband's b u s i n e s s a s s e t s . Her r o l e as a h o u s e w i f e and mother f a c i l i t a t e s h i s p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h h i s b u s i n e s s . But t h a t i s n o t t h e case h e r e . In my v i e w , th e w i f e has n o t s a t i s f i e d t h e onus on h e r t o p r o v e t h a t she made a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o h e r husband's i n t e r e s t i n t h e S a s k a t c h e w a n p r o p e r t i e s , w h i c h a c c o r d i n g l y , I f i n d , i s n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t . W h i l e S amue1s i n s i s t s t h a t t h e r e must be some c o n n e c t i o n between t h e a s s e t i n q u e s t i o n and t h e i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n , i t d i d a t l e a s t l e a v e open t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h a t r e q u i r e m e n t b e i n g p r o v e n by t h e f a c t o f t h e husband h a v i n g more time t o d e v o t e t o h i s b u s i n e s s e s b e c a u s e o f 9 1 h i s w i f e ' s a c t i v i t i e s i n the home. B l o c k b e r g e r v B l o c k b e r g e r t o o k a s t r i c t e r a p p r o a c h . In h o l d i n g t h a t Mrs. B l o c k b e r g e r ' s h o u s e k e e p i n g d u t i e s d i d n o t a s s i s t h e r h u s b and i n t h e o p e r a t i o n o f h i s b u s i n e s s , 9 2 G o u l d J . r e m a r k e d : The t r e n d o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a d e c i s i o n s seems t o be t o w a r d s t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t when the' w i f e c a r r i e s out a d e q u a t e l y w i f e l y and m o t h e r l y d u t i e s , she f r e e s the h u s b and t o a d v a n c e . h i s f o r t u n e s i n t h e b u s i n e s s w o r l d and t h a t t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t h i s f o r t u n e s are a d v a n c e d , she i s e n t i t l e d p r i m a f a c i e t o o n e - h a l f o f t h e a d vance, b e c a u s e h e r i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n has t a k e n t h e a s s e t o u t o f t h e e x c e p t i o n i n s . 4 6 ( l ) , and b r o u g h t i t w i t h i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f f a m i l y a s s e t s i n s . 4 5 ( 3 ) ( e ) : a r i g h t , s h a r e o r i n t e r e s t o f a s p o u s e i n a v e n t u r e t o w h i c h money o r money's worth was, d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y , c o n t r i b u t e d by o r on b e h a l f o f t h e o t h e r s p o u s e " . The f i r s t f l a w i n t h e above p r o p o s i t i o n i s t h a t i t assumes t h a t the h u s b and w o u l d be c a r r y i n g out " e f f e c t i v e - 6 5 -management o f h o u s e h o l d and c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " i f h i s w i f e di,d n o t do so. I see no j u r i s d i c t i o n f o r t h a t a s s u m p t i o n . To assume t h a t such w o u l d o c c u r i s t o be b l i n d t o the o r d i n a r y and e x p e c t e d c o n d u c t o f t h e Western C a n a d i a n husband. The s e c o n d and the. l a r g e r f l a w i n the p r o p o s i t i o n i s t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t " e f f e c t i v e management o f h o u s e h o l d and c h i l d -r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " by a w i f e i n v a r i a b l y must make an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o r o p e r a t i o n o f t h e husband's b u s i n e s s .... o r i n v a r i a b l y must c o n s t i t u t e an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o a husband's " r i g h t , s h a r e o r i n t e r e s t i n a v e n t u r e " . . . The A c t does n o t say or c o n n o t e t h a t . A l l i t c o n n o t e s i s t h a t " e f f e c t i v e management o f h o u s e h o l d o r c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " may, c a n , n o t , must, c o n s t i t u t e an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n . T h e r e must be some c o n n e c t i o n between the w i f e ' s c o n d u c t and the a s s e t i n q u e s t i o n . A c o n t r a r y view was p u t f o r w a r d by S p e n c e r L . J . S . C . i n Vance v 9 3 9 4 Vance . H a v i n g r e f e r r e d t o B l o c k b e r g e r , he c o n t i n u e d : With g r e a t r e s p e c t , I i n c l i n e t o t h e view t h a t by e f f e c t i v e l y • managing t h e h o u s e h o l d or c h i l d - r e a r i n g , t h e w i f e r e l i e v e s t h e h u s b a nd o f a c o n c e r n t h a t w o u l d o t h e r w i s e be h i s . T h a t i s n o t t o s a y t h a t he would h i m s e l f n e c e s s a r i l y assume t h e s e o b l i g a t i o n s , b u t t h a t he w o u l d be b u r d e n e d w i t h t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f e n s u r i n g t h a t somehow t h e y were d i s c h a r g e d . On t h e f a c t s i n Van ce ( t h e w i f e had a c t i v e l y e n c o u r a g e d th e h u s b a n d i n h i s b u s i n e s s e n d e a v o u r s and h o s t e d a number o f b u s i n e s s p a r t i e s f o r h i m ) , he d i s t i n g u i s h e d B l o c k b e r g e r and f o u n d t h a t t h e w i f e d i d c o n t r i b u t e i n d i r e c t l y t o t h e husband's b u s i n e s s c a r e e r . 95 E l s o m v E1som was more s p e c i f i c . A g a i n t h e w i f e h e r e was o n l y a b l e t o p r o v e a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o h e r husband's b u s i n e s s a s s e t s by v i r t u e o f h e r r o l e as a w i f e and mother, b e i n g one o f t h a t c l a s s d e s c r i b e d by L ocke J . a s : " . . . o r d i n a r y - s a t i s f i e d and r e a s o n a b l y happy i n d i v i d u a l s whose e f f o r t s s u s t a i n t h e m s e l v e s , t h e i r h u s b a n d s , th e h o u s e h o l d , and 96 p e r h a p s c o n s t i t u t e 75% o f t h e f a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a " ' . The c o u p l e had one c h i l d and t h e husband s p e n t c o n s i d e r a b l e t i m e d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e commuting between E n g l a n d and Canada on b u s i n e s s t r i p s . -66-In d e c i d i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t the w i f e ' s e f f o r t s s a t i s f i e d t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f s.45(3) (e) , Locke J . s p e c i f i c a l l y r e j e c t e d t h e B l o c k b e r g e r y B l o c k b e r g e r a p p r o a c h and p r e f e r r e d t h e s t a t e m e n t o f S p e n c e r L . J . S . C . i n 97 Van ce v Vance, q u o t e d above. He c o n c l u d e d : ' In t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , w i t h t h e h u s b a n d s h u t t l i n g back and f o r t h between E n g l a n d and Canada t h r o u g h o u t t h e whole o f t h e m a r r i a g e , I c a n n o t see how, p a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r t h e c h i l d a r r i v e d , she d i d n o t r e l i e v e him o f " c o n c e r n " a t one p l a c e o r a n o t h e r . Prima f a c i e h e r s h a r e i s 50%. Van ce v Van ce was a l s o p r e f e r r e d o v e r t h e B l o c k b e r g e r d e c i s i o n 98 i n Wagner v Wagner . McDonald L . J . S . C . h e r e ^ i n t i m a t e d t h a t by m e r e l y e s t a b l i s h i n g h i s o r h e r own r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r o r i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e h o u s e h o l d management o r c h i l d - r e a r i n g a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e f a m i l y , t h e spouse c l a i m i n g an i n t e r e s t i n b u s i n e s s a s s e t s o r a v e n t u r e owned by t h e o t h e r spouse has e s t a b l i s h e d , by v i r t u e o f s.46(2) , a p r i m a f a c i e c a s e . T h a t case c o u l d be met by t h e o t h e r spouse e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t such i n v o l v e m e n t was n o t " e f f e c t i v e " o r t h a t no " s a v i n g s " r e s u l t e d or t h a t t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f t h e c l a i m i n g spouse d i d n o t have any c o n n e c t i o n , d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t , w i t h t h e b u s i n e s s o r v e n t u r e i n q u e s t i o n . Even i f t h e f a c t s so p r o v e d were n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o overcome t h e p r i m a f a c i e c a s e • a r i s i n g from t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e s t a t u t e , t h e y might have a d i r e c t b e a r i n g om t h e f a c t o r s e n u m e r a t e d i n s.51 and r e s u l t i n t h e c o u r t a w a r d i n g an u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f b u s i n e s s a s s e t s . A l t h o u g h t h e Vance a p p r o a c h seems t o be t h e one b e i n g f o l l o w e d at p r e s e n t , i t may be q u e s t i o n e d w h e t h e r such an a p p r o a c h i s c o r r e c t . A l t h o u g h home and c h i l d c a r e may amount t o an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n under s . 4 6 ( 2 ) , t h e y c l e a r l y do n o t i n a l l c a s e s . I f some c o n n e c t i o n between t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n and t h e a s s e t s t o be s h a r e d i s n o t e s t a b l i s h e d , -67-any s u b s t a n c e b e h i n d t h e f a m i l y a s s e t / n o n - f a m i l y a s s e t ( b u s i n e s s a s s e t ) d i s t i n c t i o n i s removed. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e th e a p p r o a c h o f the O n t a r i o c o u r t s t o t h e c o m p a r a b l e l e g i s l a t i o n i n O n t a r i o . A l t h o u g h th e l a n guage o f t h e s t a t u t e i s d i f f e r e n t , s.46 compares w i t h s.8 o f t h e 99 100 O n t a r i o s t a t u t e . In b o t h Le athe r d a l e v Le athe r d a l e and Y oun g v Young , the O n t a r i o c o u r t s e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t home and c h i l d c a r e , w i t h o u t more, are not a c c e p t a b l e c o n t r i b u t i o n s . What must be p r o v e n i s t h a t t h e w i f e , by h e r a s s u m p t i o n o f more t h a n h e r f a i r s h a r e o f h o u s e h o l d r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , e n a b l e d h e r h u s b a n d t o a c q u i r e or o p e r a t e h i s b u s i n e s s a c q u i s i t i o n s . I t has a l r e a d y been n o t e d t h a t a w i f e c a n , t h r o u g h h e r d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n , a c q u i r e an i n t e r e s t i n p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n b u s i n e s s a s s e t s . The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s as t o whether an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n t h r o u g h h o u s e h o l d management and c h i l d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s c o u l d have the same e f f e c t . L o g i c a l l y t h e r e seems no r e a s o n why i t s h o u l d n o t . In many c a s e s t h e w i f e w i l l c o n t i n u e t o t a k e major c o n t r o l and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r r e a r i n g t h e c h i l d r e n a f t e r t h e s p o u s e s s e p a r a t e . T h i s p o i n t was r a i s e d , a l t h o u g h not s e t t l e d , i n T r a t c h v T r a t c h 100a M c L a c h l i n L . J . S . C . a d m i t t e d t h a t Mrs. T r a t c h had p e r f o r m e d h o u s e h o l d and c h i 1 d - r e a r i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a f t e r t h e s e p a r a t i o n , a l t h o u g h t h e y were d i m i n i s h e d by r e a s o n o f t h e husband's a b s e n c e and t h e i n c r e a s i n g i n d e p e n d e n c e o f the c h i l d r e n . He f e l t t h a t t h e r e w o u l d o f t e n be s i t u a t i o n s where s u c h a p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a c t i v i t y c o u l d f a l l under s.46(2) In t h e case at hand, however, he d e c i d e d t h a t t h i s f a c t o r ought more p r o p e r l y t o be d e a l t w i t h i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h r e a p p o r t i o n m e n t and l e f t i t f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e r e . -68-T r a t ch v T r at ch i s n o t c o n c l u s i v e on t h i s p o i n t . M c L a c h l i n L . J . S . C . ' s comments were o b i t e r . F u r t h e r m o r e , i n T r a t c h t h e p o s t -s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s had been a c q u i r e d from the p r o c e e d s o f o r on t h e s e c u r i t y o f e a r l i e r , p r e - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s . T h e r e was t h e r e f o r e a s t r o n g ease t h a t t h e y be t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n a d i s t r i b u t i o n even a p a r t from t h e w i f e ' s p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n c o n t r i b u t i o n . A l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t n e v e r t h e l e s s s u p p o r t s t h e view t h a t an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n s h o u l d g i v e t h e w i f e some i n t e r e s t i n p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s under s . 4 6 ( 2 ) . The s t a t u t e does no t p u r p o r t t o i n s i s t t h a t an i n d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n w i l l o n l y be e f f e c t i v e i f made w h i l e t h e s p o u s e s a r e s t i l l l i v i n g t o g e t h e r . Whether t h i s was an e r r o r on the p a r t o f the l e g i s l a t i v e d r a f t s m a n i s a n o t h e r q u e s t i o n . V a l u a t i o n The F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t does n o t m e n t i o n any s p e c i f i c d a t e at which a s s e t s are t o be v a l u e d . In p r a c t i c e t h e c o u r t s have p r o v e d v e r y f l e x i b l e i n t h e i r a p p r o a c h t o t h i s i s s u e . One o f t h e e a r l i e s t c a s e s on t h e i s s u e o f v a l u a t i o n was Thu v T h u _ 1 0 1 , where t h e a s s e t s a t i s s u e i n c l u d e d l a n d and t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home. D a v i e s L . J . S . C . h e l d t h a t the p r o p e r d a t e a t which t o v a l u e t h e s e a s s e t s was t h e da t e o f t r i a l . The date o f t r i a l was a l s o c h o s e n as t h e date o f v a l u a t i o n i n Mi 11 s v M i l 1 s ~*~°^ a t where E s s o n J . noted:"'"0"'"'3 . . . U n l e s s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s a r e su c h as t o make an e q u a l d i v i s i o n u n f a i r , t h e p r i n c i p l e o f e q u a l i t y r e q u i r e s t h e use o f v a l u e s c u r r e n t a t t h e time o f t h e d i v i s i o n . T h i s d a t e does n o t h o l d t r u e i n e v e r y i n s t a n c e . The C o u r t o f - 6 9 -A p p e a l has a f f i r m e d t h a t the date o f v a l u a t i o n need n o t be f i x e d a t t h e dat e o f t h e t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t under s.43 o r t h e date o f t r i a l b u t can be any o t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e d a t e . T h i s was f i r s t a s s e r t e d by t h e C o u r t o f 102 A p p e a l i n R u t h e r f o r d v R u t h e r f o r d and r e p e a t e d by McDonald J.A. i n 103 W i l l i a m s v W i l l i a m s The date o f s e p a r a t i o n w i l l i n many i n s t a n c e s be t h e a p p r o p r i a t e date o f v a l u a t i o n s i n c e t h e non-owning spouse w i l l g e n e r a l l y have made no c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e a s s e t s s i n c e t h a t d a t e . So i n D e m e t r i c k v 104 D e m e t r i c k i t was h e l d t h a t s i n c e t h e w i f e had made no c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the husband's v e t e r i n a r i a n p r a c t i c e , h i s p a r t n e r s h i p o r h i s r e t i r e m e n t s a v i n g s p l a n s i n c e t h e da t e o f s e p a r a t i o n , t h e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s e a s s e t s 105 s h o u l d be d e t e r m i n e d as o f t h a t d a t e . In Smi t h v Smi t h , however, i t was h e l d t h a t t h e date f o r t h e v a l u a t i o n o f a s s e t s must c l e a r l y be t h e date when t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f e q u i t y o f i n t e r e s t may be m a i n t a i n e d , i n o t h e r words, t h e da t e t h a t an o r d e r i s g i v e n p u r s u a n t t o t h e F a m i l y  R e l a t i o n s A c t . The f a c t s o f the case were t h a t t h e c o u p l e worked i n c o m m e r c i a l , f i s h i n g and t h e v a l u e o f the' husband's b o a t and c o m m e r c i a l f i s h i n g l i c e n c e had d e c r e a s e d s i n c e t h e p a r t i e s had s e p a r a t e d . The c o u r t p o i n t e d out. t h a t t h e w i f e had been a b l e t o keep h e r e a r n i n g s s i n c e s e p a r a t i o n w i t h o u t s h a r i n g . I f t h e husband's a s s e t s were t o be v a l u e d as o f the date o f s e p a r a t i o n she would, i n e f f e c t , be o b t a i n i n g a s h a r e i n t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s income, w h i c h was c a l c u l a t e d on an a n n u a l b a s i s . The d e c i s i o n was t h u s c l e a r l y b a s e d on i t s own f a c t s . One a s s e t v a l u a t i o n i s t h e f a m i l y a s s e t s by whi c h has c a u s e d p a r t i c u l a r d i f f i c u l t y i n r e g a r d t o p e n s i o n . As a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d , p e n s i o n s q u a l i f y as d e f i n i t i o n under s . 4 5 ( d ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , i n the v a s t -70-m a j o r i t y o f c a s e s , a number o f y e a r s w i l l e l a p s e between t h e t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t i n s.43 o r d a t e of. a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e c o u r t and t h e t i m e t h e p e n s i o n w i l l be r e a l i z e d . The dilemma the c o u r t f a c e s i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s was e x p r e s s e d by T a y l o r J . i n B e l c h e r v Belcher''" 0^: The dilemma r e s u l t s , I t h i n k , from th e f a c t t h a t the s t a t u t e t r e a t s p e n s i o n p l a n b e n e f i t s i n t h e same way as a s s e t s a l r e a d y i n e x i s t e n c e , and i t c o n t e m p l a t e s a o n c e - a n d - f o r - a l l d i v i s i o n o f such a s s e t s a t t h e t i m e o f t h e " t r i g g e r i n g " e v e n t w h i c h t e r m i n a t e s t h e f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s h i p . But p e n s i o n p l a n a s s e t s are n o t a form o f r e a l i z e d p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y which can be d i s p o s e d o f and d i v i d e d a t any t i m e . Such a p l a n i s n o t r e a l l y an " a s s e t " i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l s e n s e a t a l l ; i n such a case as t h i s i t i s m e r e l y a p o s s i b l e s o u r c e o f income w h i c h may be r e c e i v e d i n the f u t u r e and o u t ' o f w h i c h one spouse may be a b l e t o s u p p o r t t h e o t h e r d u r i n g t h e i r r e t i r e m e n t . A s e c o n d d i f f i c u l t y i n t h i s r e g a r d r e s u l t s from the f a c t t h a t t h e c o u r t s are u n d e r s t a n d a b l y r e l u c t a n t t o award a spouse a 50% i n t e r e s t i n a p e n s i o n t o which the o t h e r spouse has been c o n t r i b u t i n g * a l o n e f o r a number o f y e a r s a f t e r the s e p a r a t i o n . A l a r g e number o f c a s e s have been h e a r d i n which t h e i s s u e o f d i v i s i o n o f p e n s i o n p l a n s has a r i s e n f o r d i s c u s s i o n . I t i s n o t p r o p o s e d to embark upon an i n - d e p t h a n a l y s i s o f t h e s e c a s e s . They are t o o numerous and t o o complex. The C o u r t o f A p p e a l , however, has g i v e n an i m p o r t a n t d e c i s i o n which d e a l s e x t e n s i v e l y w i t h the d i v i s i o n o f p e n s i o n s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a and an e x a m i n a t i o n o f i t s c o n c l u s i o n s g i v e s some i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e c o m p l e x i t i e s i n v o l v e d and t h e a p p r o a c h w h i c h i t has d i r e c t e d be t a k e n t o them. In R u t h e r f o r d v R u t h e r f o r d t h e most i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f t h e d e c i s i o n i n t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l d e a l s w i t h p e n s i o n r i g h t s . A t the t i m e o f t h e t r i a l i n November 1979 t h e h u s b and had o v e r 37 y e a r s o f s e r v i c e -71-w i t h t h e p r o v i n c i a l government a l t h o u g h he was o n l y 53 y e a r s o f age. Under t h e r e l e v a n t p r o v i n c i a l s u p e r a n n u a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n t h e r e t i r e m e n t b e n e f i t i s c a l c u l a t e d by m u l t i p l y i n g t h e y e a r s o f s e r v i c e , up t o a maximum o f 35 y e a r s , t i m e s 2%, t i m e s t h e h i g h e s t a v e r a g e 5 y e a r s s a l a r y o f t h e employee. Thus t h e h u s b a n d h a d a l r e a d y r e a c h e d t h e h i g h e s t p o s s i b l e p e r c e n t a g e - 7 0 % . D e s p i t e t h i s , he c o u l d n o t r e c e i v e h i s p e n s i o n b e n e f i t u n t i l age 55. F u r t h e r m o r e , he c o u l d e l e c t t o c o n t i n u e w o r k i n g a f t e r age 55 and n o t r e t i r e u n t i l e i t h e r age 60 o r 65, t h e r e b y i n c r e a s i n g the l a s t o f t h e above m u l t i p l e s . A t the t i m e o f t r i a l t he h u s b a n d was 53. The t r i a l j u d g e h e l d t h a t t h e p e n s i o n was a f a m i l y a s s e t and d e c l a r e d t h a t t h e w i f e h e l d an u n d i v i d e d o n e - h a l f i n t e r e s t i n t h e p e n s i o n as t e n a n t i n common as o f th e date o f t h e i r s e p a r a t i o n i n 1976. He d e c l i n e d t o make f u r t h e r o r d e r s i n r e g a r d t o t h e e x a c t v a l u e o f the p e n s i o n o r as t o how i t s h o u l d be d i v i d e d . He s u g g e s t e d t h a t the p a r t i e s c o u l d a g r e e t o a method o f d i v i d i n g up the monthly p e n s i o n cheque when t h e husband e v e n t u a l l y r e t i r e d . In t h e a b s e n c e o f s u c h agreement, t h e c o u r t w o u l d make an o r d e r f o r d i v i s i o n when t h e t i m e a r o s e . I f t h e h u s b a n d c h o s e n o t t o r e t i r e a t age 55, he i n d i c a t e d t h a t the w i f e c o u l d a p p l y f o r m a i n t e n a n c e . By t h e time t h e ca s e was d e c i d e d i n t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l i n September 1981, i t was a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e husband had ch o s e n t o c o n t i n u e w o r k i n g and t h a t he was n o t g o i n g t o r e t i r e a t age 55. T h i s f a c t and the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t he might n o t r e t i r e u n t i l age 65 ( a n o t h e r 10 y e a r s ) ! r a i s e d I n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n s as t o t h e n a t u r e o f t h e w i f e ' s r i g h t and i n p a r t i c u l a r h e r r i g h t t o r e a l i z e on the p a r t o f the p e n s i o n t h a t b e l o n g e d t o h e r . -72-S e a t o n J.A. wrote an e x t e n s i v e judgment w i t h which b o t h Nemetz C.J.B.C. and C r a i g J.A. l a r g e l y c o n c u r r e d . He r e j e c t e d t h e husband's argument t h a t t h e p e n s i o n was n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t b e c a u s e i t was n o t a p r e s e n t r i g h t , b e i n g n o t y e t p a y a b l e . He a l s o r e j e c t e d the argument t h a t the F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , b e i n g g e n e r a l l e g i s l a t i o n , c o u l d n o t c o n t r o l s p e c i f i c p e n s i o n l e g i s l a t i o n . A t h i r d i s s u e r a i s e d was a s . t o when the w i f e ' s i n t e r e s t i n t h e p e n s i o n p l a n s h o u l d have been q u a n t i f i e d . The t r i a l j u d g e had u s e d t h e date o f t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i e s i n 1976 as t h e d a t e on which t h e c a l c u l a t i o n was t o be made. He had u s e d t h e d a t e o f the o r d e r d i s s o l v i n g t h e m a r r i a g e as t h e t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t under s.43. The-husband s o u g h t t o s u p p o r t t h e t r i a l j u d g e ' s use o f t h e d a t e o f s e p a r a t i o n as t h e d a t e of e v a l u a t i o n on t h e b a s i s t h a t t h e r e was a k i n d o f " s e p a r a t i o n agreement" o r a r r a n g e m e n t which the husband a r g u e d q u a l i f i e d as a s e p a r a t i o n agreement under s.43, even though t h e arr a n g e m e n t between the p a r t i e s was n o t i n w r i t i n g and d i d n o t a p p e a r t o have been a f o r m a l agreement. S e a t o n J.A. r e j e c t e d t h e argument t h a t t h e ar r a n g e m e n t was a s e p a r a t i o n agreement. N e v e r t h e l e s s he took t h e view t h a t t h e date f o r e v a l u a t i o n c o u l d be moved back t o t h e d a t e o f the s e p a r a t i o n i n 1976, even though t h e t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t d i d n o t o c c u r u n t i l t h e o r d e r d i s s o l v i n g the m a r r i a g e i n 1979, on t h e b a s i s t h a t under s s . 5 1 and 52 t h e r e was a d i s c r e t i o n t o move t h e d a t e f o r t h e e v a l u a t i o n and t h a t i t was p r o p e r i n t h i s case t o do so. F o u r t h , an i s s u e a r o s e as t o whether the husband s h o u l d be o b l i g a t e d t o pay any money t o t h e w i f e i f he e l e c t e d t o keep w o r k i n g , b e a r i n g i n mind t h a t the w i f e had been h e l d a t t r i a l t o be an owner - 7 3 -as a t e n a n t i n common as t o p a r t o f the p e n s i o n p l a n . C o u l d she compel h e r husband t o pay h e r any money u n t i l he e l e c t e d t o r e t i r e ? I f s o , was i t p r o p e r t o r e f e r t o t h o s e payments as m a i n t e n a n c e o r s h o u l d t h e y be c a l l e d s o m e t h i n g e l s e ? In a n s w e r i n g t h i s q u e s t i o n , S e a t o n J.A. h e l d t h a t i f t h e a p p e l l a n t h u s b and h e l d up t h e p e n s i o n , a p o r t i o n o f t h e r i g h t t o which i s owned by t h e r e s p o n d e n t w i f e , t h e n t h e h u s b a n d s h o u l d be r e q u i r e d t o pay c o m p e n s a t i o n t o the w i f e , b u t n o t m a i n t e n a n c e . The c o m p e n s a t i o n w o u l d be t h e amount she would r e c e i v e i f he had r e t i r e d . He c o n c l u d e d t h a t i f Mrs. R u t h e r f o r d e l e c t e d t o t a k e t h e immediate p e n s i o n , Mr. R u t h e r f o r d w o u l d be o b l i g e d t o pay h e r an amount e q u a l t o h e r s h a r e o f t h e p e n s i o n she w o u l d have r e c e i v e d i f he had r e t i r e d a t age 55. I f she p r e f e r r e d t o w a i t , he s u g g e s t e d she s h o u l d be a l l o w e d t o e l e c t any date c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e p l a n t o b e g i n t o e n f o r c e such payments. F o r •. example, i t a p p e a r s t h a t i f she chose t o w a i t u n t i l t h e h u s b and r e a c h e d 60 and was s t i l l w o r k i n g , she c o u l d g e t h e r i n t e r e s t as c a l c u l a t e d on h i s r e t i r e m e n t b e n e f i t s as i f he had r e t i r e d a t age 60. A f i f t h i s s u e i n v o l v e d d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s h a r e o f t h e pension;..plan t o w h i c h the w i f e was e n t i t l e d as o f t h e date o f s e p a r a t i o n i n 1976. S e a t o n J.A. r e c o g n i s e d t h a t t h e r e may be c a s e s where t h e r e are o t h e r v a l u a b l e a s s e t s when i t may be a p p r o p r i a t e t o a l l o w t h e spouse who has e a r n e d the p e n s i o n t o r e t a i n i t and to compensate the o t h e r spouse by d i r e c t i n g e i t h e r t h e t r a n s f e r o f o t h e r a s s e t s o r a cash payment i n an amount e q u a l t o the non-employee s p o u s e ' s s h a r e o f t h e p e n s i o n . In R u t h e r f o r d , however, the o t h e r a s s e t s o f the p a r t i e s d i d n o t make such an a p p r o a c h f e a s i b l e . Iri R u t h e r f o r d , t h e r e were t h r e e k i n d s o f v o l u n t a r y c o n t r i b u t i o n s . -74-F i r s t , Mr. R u t h e r f o r d d u r i n g t h e m a r r i a g e had p a i d money i n t o h i s p e n s i o n f u n d on a p u r e l y v o l u n t a r y b a s i s as a way o f s a v i n g e x t r a money f o r r e t i r e m e n t . The C o u r t o f A p p e a l h e l d t h a t t h e w i f e was e n t i t l e d t o a s h a r e i n t h a t money. S e c o n d l y , he had p a i d money i n t o the fund on a v o l u n t a r y b a s i s a f t e r t h e i r s e p a r a t i o n . In r e g a r d to t h i s group o f c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h e c o u r t n o t e d t h a t i f t h e s e c o n t r i b u t i o n s came from f a m i l y a s s e t s t h e y would be s h a r e a b l e , o t h e r w i s e n o t s o . The l a s t k i n d o f c o n t r i b u t i o n ; - t h o s e e a r l y c o n t r i b u t i o n s w h i c h were r e c l a s s i f i e d b e c a u s e o f the c o n t r i b u t i o n s made d u r i n g t h e 3 6 t h . and l a t e r y e a r s o f s e r v i c e - t h e s e were c l a s s i f i e d as new payments and were h e l d n o t t o be s h a r e a b l e b e c a u s e t h e y were not e a r n e d b e f o r e t h e s e p a r a t i o n . C o u n s e l were l e f t to work out the p r e c i s e f i g u r e s i n r e g a r d t o a l l v o l u n t a r y c o n t r i b u t i o n s . In r e g a r d t o t h e d i v i s i o n o f t h e 10 8 o b l i g a t o r y c o n t r i b u t i o n s , S e a t o n J.A. n o t e d : In n o r m a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h e d i v i s i o n w o u l d be b a s e d on t h e number o f y e a r s c o n t r i b u t i o n . But t h a t i s not a p p r o p r i a t e h e r e b e c a u s e a f t e r t h e 35th y e a r the p e n s i o n has been f u l l y e a r n e d . The d e n o m i n a t o r t h e r e f o r e s h o u l d be 35 y e a r s , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e number o f y e a r s employment i n e x c e s s t h e r e o f . The e v i d e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t the 35 y e a r mark was about o n e - h a l f y e a r a f t e r the s e p a r a t i o n . Her s h a r e i s t h e r e f o r e one h a l f m u l t i p l i e d by 34^ d i v i d e d by 35. T h a t l e a d s t o a f a c t o r o f .493. F i n a l l y , the r e s p o n d e n t w i f e s o u g h t an o r d e r t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t the S u p e r a n n u a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n e r must t r e a t t h e w i f e as a p e n s i o n e r and as s u c h p r o v i d e t o h e r a l l o f t h e r i g h t s and o p t i o n s g i v e n t o t h e employee husband. S e a t o n J.A. r e j e c t e d s u c h an o r d e r , f e e l i n g t h a t i n v o l v i n g t h e S u p e r a n n u a t i o n C o m m i s s i o n e r and o t h e r s i n f a m i l y l i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d be a v o i d e d f o r r e a s o n s o f t i m e and c o s t . He d i d h o l d , h o w e v e r , . t h a t t h i s was a p r o p e r case t o d e c l a r e t h a t Mr. R u t h e r f o r d be a t r u s t e e o f Mrs. R u t h e r f o r d ' s s h a r e o f t h e p e n s i o n . - 7 5 -Th e d e c i s i o n i n R u t h e r f o r d v :Rutherf o r d has n o t y e t r e s o l v e d a l l p e n s i o n i s s u e s . The v a r i e t y o f p e n s i o n p l a n s and t h e d i f f e r e n t f a c t u a l p o s i t i o n s i n w h i c h the p a r t i e s may f i n d t h e m s e l v e s w i l l e n s u r e a c e r t a i n amount o f f u t u r e l i t i g a t i o n o v e r p e n s i o n s . In p a r t i c u l a r , t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l d i d n o t c o n s i d e r the p o s i t i o n s h o u l d Mr. R u t h e r f o r d r e m a r r y . P r e s u m a b l y , t h e s e c o n d Mrs. R u t h e r f o r d would a l s o be h e l d e n t i t l e d t o s h a r e i n some p a r t o f t h e p e n s i o n . I t i s u n c l e a r how a c o u r t would a p p r o a c h such a s i t u a t i o n , or i n d e e d what o p t i o n s w o u l d be open t o a c o u r t i n t h i s r e g a r d under t h e l e g i s l a t i o n . The s t a t u t e w o u l d appear t o have g i v e n i n s u f f i c i e n t t h o u g h t t o t h e i s s u e s which c o u l d a r i s e as a r e s u l t o f t h e b l a n k e t i n c l u s i o n o f p e n s i o n s under s . 4 5 ( d ) . C h a n g i n g c h a r a c t e r o f a s s e t s . F a m i l y a s s e t s depend i n g e n e r a l f o r t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n on t h e r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t t h e y be o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . I f a c o u r t f i n d s t h a t a t one time a s s e t s were u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , t h e i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n a r i s e s w hether a change i n . u s e can a l t e r t h e i r i d e n t i t y as f a m i l y a s s e t s . The answer w i l l depend i n p a r t on t h e d a t e at w h ich the c o u r t c h o o s e s t o c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e m a t r i m o n i a l p r o p e r t y , t h a t i s , w h e ther i t c h a r a c t e r i z e s them a t t h e date o f s e p a r a t i o n o r s.43 t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t . A f u r t h e r d i f f i c u l t y a r i s e s w i t h r e g a r d t o a f t e r a c q u i r e d or p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n p r o p e r t y . I t has a l r e a d y been s u b m i t t e d t h a t i n g e n e r a l t h e c o u r t w i l l n o t i n c l u d e p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s as f a m i l y a s s e t s . The s i t u a t i o n may be d i f f e r e n t , however, where the a f t e r a c q u i r e d p r o p e r t y has been p u r c h a s e d w i t h th e p r o c e e d s o f s a l e from what would have been r e g a r d e d as a; f a m i l y a s s e t . - 7 6 -I t seems at l e a s t t h a t where p r o p e r t y was u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e a t the t i m e o f s e p a r a t i o n , t h e f a c t t h a t u s e r has c h a n g e d s i n c e then w i l l not a f f e c t t h e c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y as a f a m i l y a s s e t . The p o i n t was e x p l a i n e d by C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . i n F e n n i n g s v 109 F e n n i n g s : S e c t i o n 43 o f t h e A c t e n t i t l e s each spouse t o an i n t e r e s t i n each f a m i l y a s s e t when an o r d e r f o r d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e i s f i r s t made. The q u e s t i o n t h e n i s w h e t h e r o r not t h e f a m i l y a s s e t s t o w h i c h t h e p a r t i e s are e n t i t l e d are o n l y t h o s e which e x i s t as such at t h e da t e o f the t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t s e t out i n s.43 - i n t h i s c ase t h e o r d e r f o r d i s s o l u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e . T h e r e i s as y e t a p p a r e n t l y no e x p r e s s a u t h o r i t y on t h i s p o i n t . Mr. Warren r e f e r s me t o s s . 5 1 ( c ) and 5 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) o f the A c t . S e c t i o n 51(c) i n c l u d e s as a t e s t o f a f a i r d i v i s i o n t h e da t e when p r o p e r t y was d i s p o s e d o f . But the s.51 c r i t e r i a does n o t a p p l y at a l l u n l e s s t h e r e i s f i r s t a d i v i s i o n under s.43, i . e . , t h e r e a l r e a s y e x i s t f a m i l y a s s e t s t o be s h a r e d . S e c t i o n 52(2) (c) a l l o w s t h e c o u r t t o o r d e r c o m p e n s a t i o n where p r o p e r t y has been d i s p o s e d o f . In J a r v i s v J a r v i s , ( 1 9 7 9 ) , 14 B.C.L.R. 324 ( S . C . ) , V e r c h e r e J . h e l d t h a t a husband's p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e d i d not come from f a m i l y a s s e t s . From t h i s i t may be i n f e r r e d t h a t c o m p e n s a t i o n may be o r d e r e d f o r t h e d i s p o s a l o f f a m i l y a s s e t s , b u t t h i s w i l l h a r d l y a p p l y i f i n s t e a d o f d i s p o s a l , the o r d i n a r y use o f t h e s e a s s e t s has m e r e l y been changed from a f a m i l y t o a n o n - f a m i l y p u r p o s e . N e v e r t h e l e s s i t i s c l e a r from the c a s e s w h i c h have so f a r been d e c i d e d under t h e A c t t h a t the c o u r t has i n c l u d e d as f a m i l y a s s e t s p r o p e r t y which has been u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e , b u t i s no l o n g e r . A f t e r a s e p a r a t i o n (but n o t a t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t " s e p a r a t i o n agreement" under s.43) t h e s e a s s e t s a r e o f t e n used e x c l u s i v e l y by one spouse o r the o t h e r f o r s e p a r a t e p u r p o s e s and not f o r a f m a i l y p u r p o s e . N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e y are i n c l u d e d as f a m i l y a s s e t s , t h e i m p l i e d a s s u m p t i o n b e i n g t h a t once an a s s e t has a c h i e v e d t h e s t a t u s o f a f a m i l y a s s e t i t does n o t e a s i l y l o s e such s t a t u s . . . I f t h i s were not so t h e r e s u l t c o u l d be d i s a s t e r o u s f o r one or o t h e r o f the s p o u s e s . A husband who owned t h e f a m i l y home c o u l d s e l l i t s h o r t l y b e f o r e t r i a l and by u s i n g t h e p r o c e e d s f o r a n o n - f a m i l y p u r p o s e d e p r i v e h i s w i f e o f an i n t e r e s t i n t h e p r o c e e d s . Such a r e s u l t would o b v i o u s l y d e f e a t the p u r p o s e o f s.43. S i m i l a r l y f a m i l y a s s e t s which c o m p r i s e a v e n t u r e i n t e r e s t (s.45(3) (fe) ) or a b u s i n e s s i n t e r e s t (s.46) , because o f a s p o u s e ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n , do n ot cease t o be f a m i l y a s s e t s , i n my view, b e c a u s e t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n has ended b e f o r e the t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t . Cases s i n c e d e c i d e d have a s s e t has been c h a r a c t e r i z e d as c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s i m p l y b e c a u s e f o l l o w e d t h e p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t once an a f a m i l y a s s e t , i t does not l o s e t h a t t h e s p ouses have s e p a r a t e d and u s e r o f -77-t h e a s s e t has t h e n changed. P r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d by s p o u s e s a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n b u t b e f o r e t h e 110 t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t i n s.43 a r e n o t g e n e r a l l y r e g a r d e d as f a m i l y a s s e t s Where, however,- the new p r o p e r t y has been a c q u i r e d from t h e p r o c e e d s o f s a l e from a f a m i l y a s s e t , t h e s i t u a t i o n may be d i f f e r e n t . The l a t t e r s i t u a t i o n must be d i s c u s s e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e e f f e c t o f a s a l e o f f a m i l y a s s e t s by t h e l e g a l owner. The F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t r e t a i n s t h e c o n c e p t o f s e p a r a t e p r o p e r t y w h i l e t h e s p o u s e s a r e l i v i n g t o g e t h e r . I t i s o n l y upon m a r r i a g e breakdown t h a t a spouse becomes e n t i t l e d t o a s h a r e i n t h e f a m i l y a s s e t s , i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e i r l e g a l o w n e r s h i p . A c c o r d i n g l y each spouse i s f r e e t o d i s p o s e o f h i s o r h e r a s s e t s d u r i n g t h e s u b s i s t e n c e o f t h e m a r r i a g e . Where a spouse has d i s p o s e d o f a s s e t s a f t e r an e n t i t l e m e n t t o s h a r e i n them has a r i s e n under t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t , s.52(2) (c) comes i n t o o p e r a t i o n . T h i s s e c t i o n empowers a c o u r t t o o r d e r a spouse t o pay c o m p e n s a t i o n to t h e o t h e r spouse where p r o p e r t y has been d i s p o s e d o f . C a t l i f f L . J . S . C . e x p l a i n e d i n McLennan v McLenn an : . . . w h i l e p r o p e r t y a c q u i r e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n i s n o t a f a m i l y a s s e t , t h e means by w h i c h such p r o p e r t y i s a c q u i r e d - money o r a s s e t s - may have c o n s t i t u t e d f a m i l y a s s e t s o r p o t e n t i a l f a m i l y a s s e t s so t h a t a c l a i m f o r c o m p e n s a t i o n f o r the d i s p o s i t i o n o f p r o p e r t y (under s.52(2) (c)) would r e m a i n . I t h u s c o n s t r u e " p r o p e r t y " i n s.52(2) (c) t o r e f e r t o f a m i l y a s s e t s or p o t e n t i a l f a m i l y a s s e t s . D i f f i c u l t y may a r i s e i n t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h i s s e c t i o n where not o n l y has t h e p r o p e r t y been d i s p o s e d o f , b u t t h e p r o c e e d s o f s a l e have 112 a l s o been s p e n t . In B r a y f o r d v B r a y f o r d , f o r example, t h e husband had d i s p o s e d o f some s t o c k s a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n t o pay o f f h i s d e b t s . The w i f e -78-s o u g h t t o be compensated f o r h e r s h a r e i n t h e s t o c k s , w h i c h were r e g a r d e d 113 as h a v i n g been f a m i l y a s s e t s . P r o v e n z a n o Co. C t . J . n o t e d : . . . I must say t h a t I f i n d t h a t t h e r e i s no s t o c k t h a t c o m p r i s e s a f a m i l y a s s e t . I t i s n o t h e r e , i t i s n o t p r e s e n t t o d a y and i t has been d i s p o s e d o f and so t h e r e f o r e i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y f o r me t o c o n s i d e r t h a t and when s.51 r e f e r s t o a d i v i s i o n o t h e r t h a n 50-50, i t s a y s t h a t t h e c o u r t may c o n s i d e r t h e date when p r o p e r t y was a c q u i r e d or d i s p o s e d o f ; I would r e f e r t o s.51, which g i v e s t h e c o u r t d i s c r e t i o n and a u t h o r i t y , where p r o p e r t y has been d i s p o s e d o f , t o o r d e r t h a t spouse t o pay c o m p e n s a t i o n to t h e o t h e r s p o u s e . Now, t h a t means, as I see i t , t h a t i f t h e r e i s a f a m i l y a s s e t t h a t has been d i s p o s e d o f and money has been p u t i n t h e bank, the c o u r t can say t h a t he o r she s h o u l d pay back a c e r t a i n p e r c e n t a g e o f i t t o t h e o t h e r s i d e , b u t t h e p r o c e e d s o f t h a t a s s e t ^ o r s a l e o r d i s p o s i t i o n must be i n e x i s t e n c e . I do n o t t h i n k i t means t h a t i f t h e money i s t a k e n and s p e n t on a b i g p a r t y o r on a h o l i d a y , t h a t the p a r t y has t o a c c o u n t f o r i t u n l e s s i t can be s u b j e c t t o t h e t r u s t f i n d i n g s o f the r e l e v a n t t r u s t n a t u r e . The d a nger w i t h t h i s r e a s o n i n g , i t i s s u b m i t t e d , i s t h a t a j s p o u s e ght d i s p o s e o f h i s a s s e t s i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n and b e f o r e t r i a l , and y e t n o t be r e q u i r e d t o pay c o m p e n s a t i o n t o the o t h e r 114 spouse i f he had no a v a i l a b l e a s s e t s . The c o u r t i n Royer v Royer r e j e c t e d t h e n o t i o n t h a t any such a c t i v i t y w ould be t o l e r a t e d by t h e c o u r t s . The h u s b and i n t h i s case was i n a n e t l i a b i l i t y p o s i t i o n at t h e t i m e o f t r i a l as a r e s u l t o f h i s " w h e e l i n g and d e a l i n g " . He had i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y d i s p o s e d o f b o t h f a m i l y a s s e t s and n o n - f a m i l y a s s e t s a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n . The c o u r t f o u n d t h a t as a r e s u l t i t was i m p o s s i b l e t o d e t e r m i n e which p r e - s e p a r a t i o n and p o t e n t i a l f a m i l y a s s e t s were d i s p o s e d o f to a c q u i r e p o s t - s e p a r a t i o n a s s e t s . I t was a t i s f i e d , however, t h a t t h e r e were some a s s e t s so d e a l t w i t h . The h usband p r o v e d t h a t he no l o n g e r had any a s s e t s a t t r i a l t h a t c o u l d be p h y s i c a l l y d i v i d e d and s h a r e d w i t h the p e t i t i o n e r w i f e . The c o u r t was a l s o s a t i s f i e d t h a t he c o u l d work and g e t o u t o f h i s d e b t s i t u a t i o n : mi s 115 I am . . . s a t i s f i e d t h a t g i v e n some t i m e , and I . . . r e f e r t o h i s e x p e r t i s e i n b o r r o w i n g money, he can g e t out o f h i s p r e s e n t - 7 9 -o v e r e n c u m b e r e d f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n a n d s a l v a g e a n a p p r e c i a b l e a m o u n t o f c a s h o r c r e d i t . . . P u r s u a n t t o t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f s . 5 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) , t h e r e f o r e , i t w a s h e l d t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n e r s h o u l d b e c o m p e n s a t e d a s f a r a s i t w a s p o s s i b l e a n d r e a s o n a b l e t o d o s o , a n d t h e h u s b a n d w a s o r d e r e d t o p a y h e r # 6 , 4 0 0 . 1 1 5 a I n W a g n e r v W a g n e r a n e v e n s t r o n g e r l i n e w a s t a k e n . M c D o n a l d L . J . S . C . t o o k t h e v i e w t h a t t h e a b s e n c e o f a n i m p r o p e r m o t i v e i n t r a n s f e r r i n g a f a m i l y a s s e t t o a t h i r d p e r s o n d o e s n o t p r o h i b i t a n o r d e r f o r c o m p e n s a t i o n u n d e r s . 5 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) a n d t h a t a s p o u s e w a s n o t a t l i b e r t y t o g i v e a s u b s t a n t i a l a s s e t a s a g i f t e x c e p t a t . ' " . the r i s k o f f a c i n g a n o r d e r f o r c o m p e n s a t i o n . T h u s w h e r e t h e h u s b a n d h a d t r a n s f e r r e d h i s i n t e r e s t i n a c o m p a n y t o h i s s o n a f t e r t h e s e p a r a t i o n , t h o u g h n o t w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n o f d e f e a t i n g h i s w i f e ' s c l a i m t o a s h a r e i n t h e c o m p a n y , h e w a s n e v e r t h e l e s s o r d e r e d t o c o m p e n s a t e t h e w i f e p u r s u a n t t o s . 5 2 ( 2 ) ( c ) . A p a r t f r o m c o m p e n s a t i o n a w a r d s , t h e c o u r t s h a v e i n s o m e i n s t a n c e s e m p l o y e d t h e d o c t r i n e o f t r a c i n g w h e r e f a m i l y a s s e t s h a v e ••. b e e n c o n v e r t e d i n t o n o n - f a m i l y a s s e t s , a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n t h r o u g h s a l e o r 1 1 6 e x c h a n g e . I n T r e a c h e r v T r e a c h e r i t w a s h e l d t h a t t h e c a s h p r o c e e d s o f m o r t g a g e s s e c u r e d o r a s s e t s t o w h i c h t h e w i f e h a d i n d i r e c t l y c o n t r i b u t e d , r e a l i z e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n , w e r e f a m i l y a s s e t s . L i k e w i s e 1 1 7 i n F e n n i n g s v F e n n i n g s i t w a s h e l d t h a t c o n v e r s i o n o f a f a m i l y a s s e t t o a d i f f e r e n t a s s e t a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n r e s u l t s i n t h e s e c o n d a s s e t b e i n g c o n s i d e r e d a f a m i l y a s s e t . T h e s e c a s e s w e r e e x p r e s s l y 1 1 8 a p p r o v e d i n T r a t c h . v T r a t c h b y . M c L a c h l i n J . , w h o h e l d h e r e t h a t b u s i n e s s a s s e t s a c q u i r e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n f r o m i n t e r e s t s w h i c h w e r e -80-f a m i l y a s s e t s , under s . 4 6 were a l s o f a m i l y a s s e t s . The C o u r t o f A p p e a l 118a a d o p t e d t h i s d o c t r i n e i n Burnham v BUrriham , a w a r d i n g t h e a p p l i c a n t w i f e a o n e - h a l f i n t e r e s t i n a b o a t p u r c h a s e d a f t e r s e p a r a t i o n by h e r hu s b a n d w i t h t h e p r o c e e d s o f p r e - s e p a r a t i o n f a m i l y a s s e t s . No a u t h o r i t i e s were c i t e d i n t h e r e a s o n s f o r judgment, however. MacDonald J.A. s i m p l y n o t e d t h a t t h i s was a case o f a t r u s t e e t a k i n g t r u s t f u n d s and i n v e s t i n g them i n a new v e n t u r e . The t r u s t , t h e r e f o r e , c o n t i n u e d . No l e g i s l a t i v e g u i d e l i n e s have y e t been e s t a b l i s h e d as t o when a c o u r t s h o u l d use t h e t r a c i n g d o c t r i n e i n t h e s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , n o r has t h e r e been a c o n s i s t e n t a p p r o a c h from t h e c o u r t s i n t h i s r e g a r d . At p r e s e n t i t seems t h a t each s e t o f f a c t s w i l l be d e t e r m i n e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p o l i c y o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o u r t h e a r i n g them. I t i s t o be r e g r e t t e d t h a t t h e C o u r t o f A p p e a l i n Burnham f a i l e d t o g i v e any d i r e c t i o n i n t h i s m a t t e r . A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n c o n c e r n s whether a f a m i l y y a s s e t e v e r l o s e s i t s c h a r a c t e r as such a p a r t from where i t has been s o l d o r e x c h a n g e d f o r a n o t h e r a s s e t / T h i s p o i n t was d e a l t w i t h 119 t e n t a t i v e l y i n W o r o b i e f f v Worobie f f . In d e a l i n g w i t h t h e i s s u e o f w h e t h e r t h e p e t i t i o n e r w i f e had l o s t h e r i n t e r e s t i n t h e f o r m e r m a t r i m o n i a l home when she had g i v e n h e r s h a r e as a g i f t t o h e r husband 120 at s e p a r a t i o n , T a y l o r J . s a i d : I have c o n c l u d e d , on a r e a d i n g o f P a r t 3 as a wh o l e , t h a t p r o b a b l p no agreement s h o r t o f a s e p a r a t i o n agreement i n w r i t i n g w i l l s u f f i c e t o remove a f o r m e r " m a t r i m o n i a l a s s e t " f r o m t h e p u r v i e w o f s . 4 3 , and t h e Deed h e r e was n o t a s e p a r a t i o n agreement. The c o r r e c t n e s s o f t h i s d e c i s i o n has b e e n " q u e s t i o n e d I t -81-might w e l l be t h o u g h t , i n d e e d , t h a t where a h u s b and and w i f e have s e p a r a t e d and t h e w i f e , w i t h o u t o u t s i d e p r e s s u r e , d e c i d e s t o t r a n s f e r h e r i n t e r e s t i n c e r t a i n f a m i l y a s s e t s t o h e r h usband, t h a t a c t i o n ought t o be r e g a r d e d as h a v i n g changed t h e s t a t u s o f t h o s e a s s e t s . W o r o b i e f f v W o r o b i e f f has been r e f e r r e d t o i n t h e r e c e n t c a s e 12 2 o f Gowanlock v Gowanlock as' i n d i c a t i n g t h e t r e n d t o w a r d s a c o n c e p t o f "once a f a m i l y a s s e t , always a f a m i l y a s s e t " . S e l b i e C.J.S.C. i n d i c a t e d h e r e - t h a t n o t h i n g can be done t o t h e a s s e t i t s e l f o r t h e p r o c e e d s from i t , s u b j e c t t o the p r o v i s i o n s o f s . 4 3 ( 3 ) ( a ) and ( b ) , t h a t w i l l t a k e f r o m i t t h i s e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r . T h i s d o g m a t i c a p p r o a c h may cause u n c e r t a i n t y i n some i n s t a n c e s . F o r example, where s p o u s e s d e c i d e t o s e t t l e t h e i r f i n a n c i a l a f f a i r s out o f c o u r t and r e a c h an agreement (not a s e p a r a t i o n a g r e e m e n t ) , as t o who s h o u l d g e t what p r o p e r t y , i t seems i t w o u l d s t i l l be open t o one spouse t o have t h i s agreement s e t a s i d e i n c o u r t and a r e d i s t r i b u t i o n o r d e r e d . The p u r p o s e o f t h e law s h o u l d be t o a v o i d u n n e c e s s a r y l i t i g a t i o n . I t i s t h e r e f o r e s u b m i t t e d t h a t i n t h i s t y p e o f s i t u a t i o n t h e agreement o f t h e s p o u s e s s h o u l d s t a n d , u n l e s s t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e o f f r a u d o r undue i n f l u e n c e , o r one spouse has n o t been i n f o r m e d of h i s o r h e r l e g a l r i g h t s i n t h e m a t t e r . -82-The M a t r i m o n i a l Home The o w n e r s h i p and d i v i s i o n o f t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home i s n o t t h e s u b j e c t o f s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n i n t h e F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t . In most i n s t a n c e s , t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home w i l l be a f a m i l y a s s e t s i n c e i t w i l l have been o r d i n a r i l y u s e d f o r a f a m i l y p u r p o s e . C o n s e q u e n t l y , i n t h e absence o f a m a r r i a g e agreement o r a s e p a r a t i o n agreement, each spouse w i l l be e n t i t l e d t o a o n e - h a l f i n t e r e s t i n t h e m a t r i m o n i a l home as a t e n a n t i n common upon t h e h a p p e n i n g o f a s.43 e v e n t . E i t h e r spouse may, of c o u r s e , a p p l y f o r a j u d i c i a l r e a p p o r t i o n m e n t o f i n t e r e s t s . One i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n w h i c h has a r i s e n i n r e l a t i o n t o the m a t r i m o n i a l home i s t h e e f f e c t o f the F a m i l y R e l a t i o n s A c t where t h e 12 3 m a t r i m o n i a l home has been p u r c h a s e d under t h e V e t e r a n ' s Land A c t Where p r o p e r t y i s p u r c h a s e d under t h i s s t a t u t e , an amount of money i s l o a n e d t o t h e p u r c h a s e r by t h e d i r e c t o r o f the V e t e r a n ' s Land A c t by way of a mortgage on t h e p r o p e r t y . T i t l e t o t h e p r o p e r t y i s p l a c e d i n t h e name o f t h e d i r e c t o r , w h i c h t i t l e i s t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o t h e name o f t h e p u r c h a s e r on repayment by him o f t h e o r i g i n a l l o a n . In O n t a r i o t h e c o u r t s have n o t h e s i t a t e d t o d e a l w i t h p r o p e r t y i n t h e name o f t h e d i r e c t o r under t h e e