Counsel for the claimant made similar arguments in favour of adjusting the valuation date under s. 87 as she did with respect to unequal division under s. 95. For instance, she pointed to the relatively disparate contributions of the parties to the accumulation in value of the home and to the claimant's far greater contribution to the maintenance of the family home. In the past, this has been accepted in some cases: see for instance, Davie v. De Mark at paras. 165–69.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.