The defendant further relies on Collinge v. Collinge, 2004 BCSC 1108, where the court confirmed that an assumption of the family debt by one of the spouses after cohabitation ceases may be considered as a factor supporting reapportionment. The court in that case declined to reapportion on that basis, because it concluded that reapportionment was necessary in favour of the wife due to the disadvantage she had experienced by delaying her career development to care for the home and children.
"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.