While I agree that a “factual connection” is required, I question whether the presence or absence of a “factual” or “clear connection” - a question of fact - is reviewable on appeal. I acknowledge the admonition that it may be necessary and appropriate to scrutinize closely the contributions of business partners to the acquisition of property (per Dickson C.J. in Sorochan v. Sorochan, 1986 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1986] 2 S.C.R. 38 at para. 22). It does not follow, however, that something more than a factual connection (or, as Dickson C.J. put it, “some reasonable connection) between the breach and the assets in question made out to the satisfaction of the trier of fact is required.
"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.