In what circumstances will a court order a husband to pay his ex-wife's taxes for the purchase of expensive cars that he allegedly diverted from the sale of property to fund his lifestyle?

In Fatahi-Ghadenari v. Wilson, 2016 ONSC 6863 at para. 88, there was evidence of discrepancies in tax documents (the ones the husband had produced in the litigation and the ones that had been received from third parties did not match). The husband had diverted funds from the sale of property (exotic cars in his business) to put them beyond the reach of the wife.

In in Syed v. Syed, 2017 ONSC 2588, court orders for disclosure were disrespected, properties were encumbered with mortgages, and money was spent for unnecessary renovations, and provided to family members.

In Fraser v. Fraser, 2017 ONSC 3774, the husband had structured his affairs improperly or illegally to hide significant amounts of taxable income from the government; he sold a joint asset without even telling his spouse; and he had raised the prospect of bankruptcy.

In Barbini v. Edwards, 2014 ONSC 6762, the husband owned a business. He had not provided sufficient financial information. Interim orders for support were in place. Justice Emery made a preservation order, holding at para. 91 that it was “warranted given the complexity of the issues yet to be determined by the court in this application, questions of credibility on those issues and the ever present risk that where one party owns a business, assets could be dissipated to defeat the rights of another without it.”

In Burke v. Poitras, 2020 ONSC 3162 at para. 267-269, the court described significant failure to make financial disclosure, concealing of assets or income, disposing of jointly owned property unilaterally, and attempting to frustrate the other party’s claims