What is the test for an unconscionable marriage settlement?

After a long and difficult marriage, the parties in this case negotiated and signed a separation agreement. Based on the test outlined by this Court in Miglin v. Miglin, 2003 SCC 24 (CanLII), [2003] 1 S.C.R. 303, the trial judge determined that the agreement was unconscionable because the negotiation process was severely flawed and the resulting settlement deviated substantially from the objectives of the governing legislation. He found that the wife was mentally unstable at the time the agreement was negotiated and executed, and that the husband took advantage of this “very significant” vulnerability by agreeing to a bargain he knew was based on misleading financial information, due in part to his own deliberate non-disclosure.