J.R. v. M.R., 2023 NSSC 359

SUPREME COURT OF Nova Scotia FAMILY DIVISION Citation: J.R. v. M.R. , 2023 NSSC 359 Date: 20231127 Docket: 1206-7829 Registry: Sydney Between: J.R. Petitioner v. M.R. Respondent Judge: The Honourable Justice Lorne MacDowell Heard: July 19, 2023, in Sydney, Nova Scotia Written Release: November 30, 2023 Counsel: Courtney Somerton for the Petitioner M.R., Self-Represented By the Court: [ 1 ] This divorce involves the parenting of and support for a child, and the division of assets and debts. [ 2 ] The Petitioner is J.R. (the father). The Respondent is M.R. (the mother). The parties were married on April 29, 2017.

The parties have one child of the marriage, C.S.R., who is 11 years old. PROCEDURAL HISTORY [ 3 ] The Petition for Divorce was filed on July 14, 2022. An Amended Petition for Divorce was filed on January 19, 2023. I summarise the history as follows: a. The mother was served with the Petition for Divorce on July 25, 2022, and an amended Petition for Divorce on July 19, 2023. She has failed to file an Answer. b. Despite being served with notice to attend conferences scheduled on December 5, 2022; January 10, 2023; February 21, 2023, and March 29, 2023, the mother attended only the February 21, 2023, conference.

At that time, I questioned M.R. as to why she had not attended prior conferences and whether she was seeking legal advice. M.R. alleged that she had not attended due to anxiety arising from an in-person attendance. She further indicated that that she was pursuing Legal Aid representation. She advised that she was working and making $21,000.00 per year. c. M.R. indicated it was her intention to contest the relief sought by J.R. I set the matter over for a one (1) hour conference to be held on March 29, 2023, at 11:00 am.

I provided the parties with a Conference Memorandum, including a chart detailing the filings required. Also included was a Self-Representation information package explaining processes identifying various resources available to M.R. d. M.R. was ordered to file on or before March 20, 2023. i. Motion for Late Filing of the Answer with supporting affidavit. ii. Answer and all documentation required by Rule 59 with respect to the relief sought. e. I directed that if the Petitioner was objecting to late filing of the Answer, he was to provide an affidavit and the caselaw upon which

he relied, on or before March 24, 2023. I would then deal with the Motion for Late Filing on March 29, 2023. f. The matter came before the Court for a conference on March 29, 2023. At that time, Ms. Somerton appeared by phone with herclient, J.R. The Respondent, M.R., did not appear and had not accomplished any of the filings or motions required as directed. g. A Trial was than set for June 20, 2023. By a Conference Memorandum dated April 24, 2023, and served upon M.R on May 3,2023, the mother was advised of the date for trial and provided further filing deadlines.

She failed in every respect to meet these filingdirections. h. The matter came before the Court in Sydney on June 20, 2023, for trial. The father and his counsel appeared. The mother did not. The mother had not been served with certain of the filings made by the father. The trial was adjourned to provide the mother with thesematerials. A new trial date was set for July 19, 2023. The mother was served by the father and separately by the Court with a Notice toAppear for trial on July 19, 2023. M.R. did not attend the trial on July 19, 2023. She failed to file any documents.

I proceeded with thetrial. [4] M.R. received notice of the trial and has been given ample opportunity to participate. She failed to attend for the trial date on July19, 2023, despite being served by J.R. and the Court with notice of the time, place, and purpose of the proceeding. I proceeded in herabsence. [5] The mother is taken to have admitted to the facts and allegations in the Petition for Divorce and she is taken to have consented to therelief claimed. (Civil Procedure Rules 59.10(4)). Although the matter was uncontested, the relief claimed must be available in law andproved by admissible evidence.

It is against this backdrop that I deal with the relief sought by the father. The only evidence before me isthat tendered by the father. ISSUE 1 - Has the father established the basis for a divorce based on one (1) year separation? [6] The evidence establishes that the parties were married on April 29, 2011. The uncontradicted evidence of the father establishes thatthe parties separated on June 25, 2021. [7] I grant the divorce based upon marriage breakdown as proven by one (1) year separation.

I am satisfied there is no possibility ofreconciliation and that all prerequisites for the granting of the divorce have been met. ISSUE 2 – What parenting plan is in the best interest of the child? [8] The Divorce Act (the Act) provides me with a list of factors I must consider when making a parenting plan for the child. Section16(1) confirms that I must give paramount consideration to the child’s best interests. I must analyze parenting issues through the lens ofa child’s perspective. [9] The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in D.A.M. v.

C.J.B., 2017 NSCA 91 , confirms that when reviewing legislative factors, Imust apply a comparative and child centric approach. (see also Titus v. Kynock, 2022 NSCA 35 . [10] The child is 11 years of age. The uncontradicted evidence which I accept is that she has been in the primary care of the fathersince May 2022. [11] Child protection services became involved with the family in May 2022, because of concerns regarding the mother. At thattime the child C.S.R. began to reside primarily with her father and paternal grandmother.

The mother was not permitted parenting timeuntil October 10, 2022, after which she was permitted limited access with C.S.R. Child Welfare is no longer involved. [12] The evidence of the father, which I accept, establishes that the mother’s parenting time has been sporadic and inconsistent andis frequently arranged between the child and the mother directly, despite the father asking the mother to arrange her parenting timethrough him.

The mother has taken no steps to contest or refute the father’s evidence and has presented no evidence to the contrary. [13] The father, with the assistance of the paternal grandmother, is the primary caregiver for the child. The father has adjusted hiswork life to assume the primary parental role. In the past, his employment as a health and safety manager required he work in westernCanada on a two (2) week on, two (2) week off rotation. While he was working in Western Canada his mother would look after thechild, and he would maintain daily contact.

This changed in March of 2023, when he began to work remotely from Cape Breton. [14] I find that the father attends to the child’s day to day care and needs and has been her primary caregiver and decision makersince May of 2022. I am satisfied that the father consistently acts in the child’s best interests and that he properly meets the child’sphysical, emotional psychological, health, behavioural and social needs. [15] C.S.R. is sports-minded and is doing well in school. She is involved in extracurricular activities, including hockey, volleyball,and band.

She enjoys her time with her mother, which I am satisfied is sporadic and arranged on an hoc basis. [16] I find it to be in the best interest of the child that the father be granted primary care of C.S.R. Further, the child’s primaryresidence will be with the father. He shall have sole decision-making authority for her. [17] The father’s evidence, which I accept, paints a picture of infrequent contact with the mother, which is mainly requested by themother directly with the child. The father, on the evidence, remains encouraging of the relationship and seeks a set weekly parentingschedule for the mother.

He is seeking that the mother’s parenting time occurs on Saturdays with such other parenting time as may beagreed to between the parties. [18] I find that it is in the best interest of the child that her parenting time with the mother be scheduled on Saturdays and such other

parenting time as may be agreed to between the parties and is to be arranged by the mother directly communicating with the father, and at times according to the father’s discretion. [ 19 ] In all the circumstances, I order the following: i. The father shall have primary care, residence and sole decision making responsibility for the child. ii. That the mother, shall have parenting time on Saturdays at the fathers discretion and is to be arranged by the mother directly contacting the father.

There will be a provision in the Order allowing for such other parenting time with the mother as may be agreed to by the parties. iii. Transportation will be the responsibility of the mother. iv. The parties shall inform one another of any changes to his or her home address, home phone number, work address, work phone number, or any other means of contact such as fax numbers or e-mail addresses. v. Neither party shall speak negatively to, or about, the other party in the presence of the child nor allow any other person to do so. vi. Neither party shall discuss adult matters with the child. vii.

The parties will communicate civilly and will only discuss matters that affect the education, health and general well being of the child. viii. At all times, the parties will encourage the child to have a positive and respectful relationship with the other party and the members of the other party’s family and household. ISSUE 3 – What child support is appropriate on the evidence. [ 20 ] The father requested child support based on imputation of income at minimum wage. The mother did not file any financial information.

The evidence before me on this issue is limited. [ 21 ] The father’s evidence is that he discovered the mother was working at Walmart, full time, and was more recently employed as a supervisor at Northside Processing in North Sydney. The timeline of this discovery was not presented in evidence. [ 22 ] Unfortunately, the mother has not provided any evidence of income, income tax documents, or any information that would assist the Court at all. She has submitted to the Court that she is working and earns $21,000.00 per year.

The mother has failed to provide the required documents pursuant to the Federal Child Support Guidelines . [ 23 ] I accept, on the evidence, that the mother has not paid for any extracurricular activities. [ 24 ] Where the payor has failed to provide the requested disclosure, I may impute income according to the Federal Child Support Guidelines s.19(1)(f). [ 25 ] Imputed income must be based on evidence and not speculation. I cannot arbitrarily select an income. Facts must be proven.

The burden to prove the threshold for income imputation is on the father on the balance of probabilities. [ 26 ] The burden to disclose is on the mother. [ 27 ] This is not an unfettered discretion. It must be based on evidence not speculation. I cannot assume the facts not proven ( White v.

White 2015 NSCA 52 ). [ 28 ] Pursuant to s.23 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines, I have the discretion to draw an adverse inference against the mother for her failure to comply, and to impute income. [ 29 ] Given the mother’s failure to provide the required financial information, I, exercise my discretion pursuant to s.19(

f) of the Federal Child Support Guidelines to impute income. I also draw an adverse inference pursuant to the guidelines. [ 30 ] The evidence is that the mother is working and has worked in various capacities. She is 38 years old. She resides with her partner in the matrimonial home. Given her abject failure to file any financial information, imputation of the income is justified. [ 31 ] On the evidence, I find the father has met the burden of proof for imputing income.

I impute income in the amount of $28,288.00 annually, based on a minimum wage in Nova Scotia. [ 32 ] The mother will pay child support in the amount of $239.00 per month commencing December 1, 2023, and monthly thereafter. [ 33 ] Where a Court is determining support for the year in which the application is made, it is entitled to make a finding for the entire year. This is not a “retroactive claim”. ( Henderson v.

Micetich , 2021 ABCA 103 ). [ 34 ] Using the imputed income of $28, 288.00, for the year 2023, the mother shall pay child support from January 2023 forward and including November 2023, in the amount of $239.00 per month ($239.00 x 11 = $2,629.00). [ 35 ] The order shall include a provision that the order shall be enforceable through the Maintenance Enforcement Program. [ 36 ] Given my findings, it is unnecessary to deal with the father’s submission that I impute income based on Section 9(1)(

a) of the

Guidelines. ISSUE 4 - RETROACTIVE SUPPORT [37] The father seeks retroactive support from the date of separation. [38] Counsel for the father has correctly referred the Court to the decision of D.B.S. v. S.R.G., 2006 SCC 37, a decision of theSupreme Court of Canada. This law applies to both an originating application and a variation. [39] The Supreme Court of Canada clearly indicates that parents have an obligation to support their children commensurate withtheir income and that it is the child’s right to the support.

The Court has the power to order retroactive child support in appropriatecircumstances. [40] D.B.S. has subsequently been considered in Michel v. Grayden, 2020 SCC 24 , [2019] SCJ No 102 and in Colluci v.Colluci, 2021 SCC 24 , [2021] SCJ No 24. I have considered these Supreme Court of Canada decisions in preparing thisdecision. [41] The four factors for the Court to consider in a retroactive claim as set out in D.B.S. (supra) and updated in Colluci (supra) arewell known: a. Understandable reason for delay in seeking support. b. Conduct of the payor or parent. c. Circumstances of the child. d.

Hardship occasioned by a retroactive award. [42] The date of actual or effective notice is an important one to determine. Effective notice does not require the parent to take legalaction. It must be broached with the recipient parent, that child support be paid. Effective notice puts the payor or parent on notice so thatthey can no longer assume the status quo is acceptable. [43] The father’s evidence does not support the claim for retroactive support.

Although, the affidavit of the father established thatthe mother never contributed to extracurricular activities, neither his affidavit nor viva voce evidence established her failure to pay orcontribute for child support in the past. [44] The evidence of the father establishes his primary care of the child from sometime in May of 2022 onward. There is noevidence of the day-to-day care of the child prior to that date, whether the mother was working, nor what, if any, financial contributionshe made regarding the support of the child. [45] The Divorce Petition was filed on January 14, 2022.

It did not seek child support. The Amended Petition was filed on January19, 2023, where child support and retroactive child support was sought back to the date of separation. [46] There is no clear evidence of the father broaching child support with the mother prior to the service of the amended petition onJanuary 19, 2023. There was discussion proximate to the time of separation regarding financial matters, but the particulars of thediscussion were not detailed. [47] Pre and post-trial submissions are not evidence.

ISSUE 5 – OCCUPATION RENT [48] The father seeks occupation rent from the date of separation on June 25, 2021, based upon his $500.00 per month payment tohis mother. [49] In Carmichael v. Carmichael 2005 NSSC 318, Justice Forgeron awarded occupation rent. After conducting an extensivereview of the relevant case law, Forgeron, J. concluded at paragraphs 55-64: "[55] Occupation rent has been awarded by Nova Scotia courts where there are no children of the marriage: Mailman v.

Mailman (1991), (NS SC), 107 N.S.R. (2d) 33 (S.C.); or when the occupying spouse does not have the care of the children: Comeau v.Comeau, [1997] N.S.J. No. 409, 1997 CarswellNS 405 (T.D.); when the occupying spouse has frustrated the sale of the property, doesnot have the care of the child of the marriage, and where there was no mortgage on the home: Stoodley v. Stoodley, supra, [1997] N.S.J.No. 95; and where the nonoccupying spouse has lost interest on her share of the capital which was tied up in the matrimonial home:Nauss v. Nauss, [2002] N.S.J.

No. 55, 2002 Carswell NS 56 (S.C.). [56] I have determined that it is appropriate to award occupation rent to Ms. Carmichael for several reasons. First, there were no childrenof the marriage and thus each party had a presumptive equal need for the equity in the home. [57] Second, the home was not encumbered by a mortgage. In addition, Mr. Carmichael has received full credit for all interest paymentsand debt payments which he made post separation.

[58] Third, after leaving Baddeck in approximately October 2000, Ms. Carmichael had to pay rent for accommodations which I find were far inferior to those occupied by Mr. Carmichael in the matrimonial home. Further while in Baddeck Ms. Carmichael was required by economics to live with her mother and thus lost some of her independence. As such, these accommodations were likewise inferior to those found in the matrimonial home and utilized by Mr. Carmichael. [59] Fourth, Mr.

Carmichael has had the use of the mortgage free home during the extensive period of separation from December 199 until to date -- approximately 71 months. This was of substantial financial benefit. In contrast, Ms. Carmichael has forfeited her equity in the home for 71 months. This was of substantial financial benefit. In contrast, Ms. Carmichael has forfeited her equity in the home for 71 months. Given Ms. Carmichael's financial circumstances this was a result which she could ill afford. [60] Fifth, I find that the improvements made by Mr.

Carmichael after separation were minimal in nature from a financial perspective. Mr. Carmichael was diligent in saving receipts, bank account statements and financial particulars from 199 onward. He did so as he was aware that such would be required for the eventual divorce hearing in the event settlement could not be achieved. However no such receipts were provided in relation to the household improvements which Mr. Carmichael made. During cross examination Mr.

Carmichael admitted that his actual financial expenditure for the repairs and renovations was limited. [61] The amount of occupation rent which I would have otherwise ordered to have been paid by Mr. Carmichael is tempered for three reasons. First there was a substantial delay by Ms. Carmichael in seeking redress. It was Mr. Carmichael who eventually commenced the divorce. Ms. Carmichael did not even file an Answer until June 2005. This factor is mitigated to some extent given the financial difficulties which Ms. Carmichael was experiencing. [62] Second, Mr. Carmichael attempted to contact Ms.

Carmichael after separation to discuss the resolution of the issues, but Ms. Carmichael did not respond. Mr. Carmichael could not act unilaterally with the sale or transfer of the home. [63] Third, the matrimonial home was not vacant and Mr. Carmichael did pay for the taxes, insurance and other maintenance costs. Because he is a carpenter, Mr.

Carmichael was able to effect repairs and renovations at little financial cost, but his labour must nonetheless be recognized. [64] In light of these factors, I am ordering the payment of occupation rent in the amount of $200 per month for a period of 36 months and not the 71 months which have passed since separation. Thus the total due to Ms. Carmichael is $7,200 and this shall form part of the equalization payment. In the event Mr. Carmichael is unable to obtain financing, and the matrimonial home is to be sold, Mr. Carmichael shall continue to pay Ms.

Carmichael occupation rent in the amount of $200 per month commencing January 1, 2006 and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter until the matrimonial home is sold or Mr. Carmichael vacates the home, which first occurs." [ 50 ] I have also reviewed and considered O’Regan v. O’Regan 2009 NSSC 181 (Justice Forgeron) in coming to my decision. [ 51 ] I award occupation rent to the father from May 2022 for the following reasons: a. First, from May of 2022, the evidence establishes the mother was occupying the matrimonial home and the child was not in her primary care. b.

Second, the mother has had the advantage of living rent free in the matrimonial home while the father has paid the mortgage except for one monthly payment made by the mother. c. Third, the father, while having care of the child, has lived with his mother and paid rent to her in the amount of $500.00 per month. He did not have the advantage of living in the family residence with the child. The father commenced the divorce, and the mother did nothing to facilitate resolution while living in the matrimonial home.

The father’s attempts to engage the mother in resolution as set out in his affidavit have gone nowhere. [ 52 ] As in O’Regan (supra), the mother was clearly put on notice and understood occupation rent to be “in play” at the time of trial. The mother had time to present her case yet has done nothing. [ 53 ] I find the amount of $500.00 per month occupation rent to be reasonable in these circumstances. The mother must pay this amount to the father, which amount is calculated from May 2022 to and inclusive of the date of the mother vacates the matrimonial home.

DIVISION OF ASSETS [ 54 ] The father seeks exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, it’s listing and sale and division of assets and debts on certain terms and conditions. [ 55 ] The parties jointly own a residence located in North Sydney, Nova Scotia. At the time of purchase, the property had a value of $108, 262.00. The property is encumbered by a mortgage with CIBC. The amount owing on the mortgage as of the date of separation was $95,447.30. [ 56 ] In his Statement of Property, the father listed a line of credit with Scotia Bank in the amount, of $23,416.64 as of January 25, 2021.

The attachment for the Statement of Property with reference to this line of credit does not name either party to this divorce. No other evidence was provided by the father with respect to this debt. His affidavit confirms he is seeking to have the property sold and proceeds of the sale divided after the payment of the “monies owed to me in of debt including: (

a) outstanding mortgage, (

b) matrimonial home repairs, and (

c) retroactive child support. [ 57 ] There is no evidence addressing how this line of credit in the name of two individuals J.L.R. and R.W.R, is or could be considered a matrimonial debt. [ 58 ] Also listed on his Statement of Property is an RRSP with WealthSimple Industries Inc. in the amount of $1440.97 in the name of the father. [ 59 ] The evidence establishes that the property in North Sydney, is the matrimonial home of the parties and I so find. [ 60 ] The evidence of the father is that after separation, the mother’s boyfriend moved into the residence some 2-3 weeks after the separation. [ 61 ] I find as a fact that the mother has resided in the matrimonial home since the date of separation on June 25, 2021. [ 62 ] I further find, on the evidence, that the mortgage on the property is a matrimonial debt and that the father has been paying this mortgage since separation, except for one biweekly payment by the mother.

He has and continues to reside with his mother, with the child, and pays rent monthly in the amount of $500.00. [ 63 ] The circumstances are somewhat unusual. The father has not been in the home since separation but observed the flooding in the home based on a social media video post. He is uncertain but believes the flood damage has been repaired. He requested on one occasion to go in the home and was refused by the mother. [ 64 ] Given the above information, the father argues that the cost of repairs needed to fix the property be split equally between the parties.

There is no evidence as to the cost of repairs which may be necessary to effect sale. [ 65 ] I am satisfied that the father has been paying the mortgage on an ongoing basis. The evidence confirms that both parties are named on the property and both parties are responsible for the mortgage. I accept the father has been making bi-weekly payments and that only one bi-weekly payment has been made by the mother. Taxes are paid through the mortgage. [ 66 ] He has not, however, been in the residence since the separation.

He is not aware of its current condition. [ 67 ] The father seeks an order to sell the home and after certain deductions, the proceeds from the sale to be divided equally. The mother has lived in the home without contribution, paying only the one payment noted. [ 68 ] The father seeks exclusive possession of the home to facilitate the repairs, listing and sale of the home. [ 69 ] The mother has, as noted, offered no evidence or position. [ 70 ] Pursuant to Matrimonial Property Act , I have the authority to order the sale of the home.

That is my intention. [ 71 ] I do not, however, on the evidence have authority to order exclusive possession of the home as sought. [ 72 ] S.11(1) of the Matrimonial Property Act states:

a) Powers of court respecting matrimonial home 11

(1) Notwithstanding the ownership of a matrimonial home and its contents, the court may by order, on the application of a spouse, (

a) direct that one spouse be given exclusive possession of a matrimonial home, or part thereof, for life or for such lesser period as the court directs and release any other property that is a matrimonial home from the application of this Act ; (

b) direct the spouse to whom exclusive possession is given under clause (

a) to pay such periodic or other payments to the other spouse as is prescribed in the order; (

c) direct that the contents of a matrimonial home that are matrimonial assets, or any part thereof, remain in the home for the use of the person given possession; (

d) determine the obligation to repair and maintain the matrimonial home and to pay for other liabilities arising in respect of the matrimonial home; (

e) authorize the disposition or encumbrance of the interest of a spouse in a matrimonial home who has not been granted exclusive

possession; (

f) where a false affidavit is made respecting a matrimonial home or where a matrimonial home or any interest therein is disposed of contrary to the provisions of this Act , direct (

i) the person who made the false affidavit, (ii) any person who knew at the time the affidavit was false and thereafter conveyed the property, or (iii) any person who improperly disposed of the matrimonial home or interest therein, to substitute other real property for the matrimonial home or to set aside money or security to stand in place of the matrimonial home, subject to such terms and conditions as the court considers appropriate. [ 73 ] Although, s.11 gives the Court broad powers in this respect, those powers are constrained by s.11(4) which states: a. Conditions for order for possession:

(4) The court may only make an order for possession of the matrimonial home under subsection (1) or (3) where, in the opinion of the court (

a) other provision for shelter is not adequate in the circumstances; or (

b) it is in the best interests of a child to make such an order. [ 74 ] No evidence is before me addressing this. Rather, the position of the father is he requires exclusive possession to get the property ready for sale. [ 75 ] As such I cannot and do not order exclusive possession. [ 76 ] With respect to the matrimonial home, situated in North Sydney, Nova Scotia, I order the following: a. The matrimonial home will be listed with a realtor of the father’s choice, “the listing agent”. b. The mother shall vacate the matrimonial home no later than January 27, 2024.

The father will pay the matrimonial home’s existing mortgage., property taxes and insurance, until the date of sale. c. After the date of vacant possession, neither party will have exclusive possession of the matrimonial home, nor will they occupy the matrimonial home except as follows: i. The father shall have access to the matrimonial home for the purposes of effecting repairs to the home and as necessary to effect its sale and the father shall seek direction of the listing agent, as to the repairs that ought to be completed.

The opinion of the listing agent shall be in writing and provided to the mother and the father. Otherwise, the property is be sold “as is where is”. ii. Should , in the written opinion of the listing agent, repairs be necessary, the father is authorized to retain qualified contractors to affect the necessary repairs, provided the repairs do not exceed $15,000.00. Repairs in excess of $15,000.00 will require the Court’s approval pursuant to and after the father files a Motion with Affidavit in support.

The cost of these repairs shall be deducted from the proceeds of sale and shall be documented and provided to the mother. iii. The father shall have unrestricted access to the matrimonial home for the purpose of effecting the repairs and for the reasonable maintenance, safeguarding and preservation of the matrimonial home. iv. The mother will be permitted to inspect the repairs to the matrimonial home as arranged by the father.

This inspection will be done by a third party chosen by the mother who will give the name of said third party along with the time and date of the inspection, to the father on at least five (5) days' notice. The father shall facilitate the inspection in these circumstances and both parties may be present for the inspection. d. The net proceeds from the sale of the Matrimonial home shall be divided equally between the parties.

The net proceeds of the sale are the sale proceeds after the usual adjustments on closings, as agreed between the vendor and the purchaser; namely real estate commission, legal fees and disbursements, relating to the sale only. Usual closing costs and payments of the existing mortgage and standard real estate closing adjustments will be deducted from the sale proceeds. The net sale proceeds will then be equally divided between the parties, subject to the following payments being transferred to the father from the mother’s half share: (

i) One half mortgage payments made by the father, from the date of separation to the date of the sale of the matrimonial home less the one bi-weekly payment made by the mother. (ii) Arrears of child support in the amount of $ 2629. (iii) Occupation rent in the amount of $500 per month commencing from May 1 of 2022 and continuing on the first day of every month thereafter until the mother vacates the home. (iv) One half of the repair and maintenance expenses expended by the father pursuant to this decision to the extent paid by the father. [ 77 ] There is no evidence before me to establish the Scotia Bank line of credit is a matrimonial debt. As such, it is not to be

deducted from the sale proceeds. There is no evidence as to whether the RRSP in the amount of $1441 in the name of the father is a matrimonial asset and I do not make order regarding its division. [ 78 ] Given the mother has absented herself from this proceeding, I have little faith that she will cooperate with the sale.

The father shall be responsible for the matrimonial home sale, including but not limited to, the selection of realtors, the terms of the listing agreement, the sale price, (which will be based on the written recommendation of the realtor), accepting or rejecting offers, making offers and closing terms. [ 79 ] The mother shall execute all documents reasonably required for the matrimonial home listing and sale.

If she fails to cooperate then the Sheriff is authorized to sign on her behalf. [ 80 ] I expressly reserve my jurisdiction to review the terms and the manner of the matrimonial home sale and to resolve all issues with respect to the sale including if necessary to direct the sale by auction, sheriff or other process. [ 81 ] Ms. Somerton shall draft the Order. COSTS [ 82 ] I will allow the parties to provide written submissions on costs. They shall have four weeks for the service of this decision to file their submissions with the Court. MacDowell. J.