Both v. Both
Financial Harm and Ontario Matrimonial Home Laws
Edith Both began the case of Both v. Both after her husband of more than 40 years, Albert Both, placed mortgages against the couple’s matrimonial home and a manufacturing business they owned. Edith Both separated from her husband and moved out of the home in 2003.
In the case, Edith Both sought a preservation of assets, so her husband couldn’t place any mortgages on their properties or sell the properties without her authorization. Albert Both claimed he had the right to place mortgages against the couple’s matrimonial home because she moved out, and he claimed that proved she no longer wanted any say regarding their properties. One of the couple’s daughters contended that his intention was to create a new trust for the properties in which Edith Both would not be a beneficiary.
The Court ruled that Albert Both had the potential to cause incredible financial harm to Edith Both by creating the trust and by signing off on the mortgages. The Court granted Edith Both her wish of a preservation of assets.
Matrimonial Home Laws
A matrimonial home is given special status and neither spouse even if they are the sole owner can transfer or mortgage a matrimonial home without the consent of the other spouse. The home that was ordinary occupied by the spouses on the date of separation continues to be the matrimonial home until the matter has settled or resolved itself through the court system. Thus, when one spouse vacates the matrimonial home after separation the matrimonial home still continues to be the matrimonial home and neither party can transfer or sell it unless the parties obtain a Divorce. Based upon the court’s finding of Mr. Both’s wrongful conduct regarding the placing of a mortgage against the matrimonial home it was clear that the court would freeze Mr. Both’s assets in order to secure any equalization payment owing from Mr. Both to his wife.
© Attorneys Online™, Inc. | Law Firm Newsletter Provided by Attorneys Online™, Inc.
