Court adds $48,025.54 post-separation credit and upholds key rulings in contested family law case
The Ontario Court of Appeal clarifies post-separation inheritance credits in family law equalization, partially allowing an appeal in Robson v. Pellerin, 2025 ONCA 680.
A strenuously contested family law dispute between John Sinclair Petifer Robson and Marie Carmel Brigitte Pellerin led the Court of Appeal for Ontario to examine the treatment of post-separation inheritance credits and the equalization of net family property. The case arose from a trial before Justice Pamela MacEachern of the Superior Court of Justice, which required the court to address numerous issues, including parenting, child support, spousal support, whether there was a valid and enforceable separation agreement, a claim by the appellant for an order vesting title to the matrimonial home and cottage in his name as of the date of separation, equalization and post-separation adjustments, and the sale of the matrimonial home and cottage.
Robson appealed aspects of the trial judge’s order, specifically the equalization calculation, post-separation adjustments to the equalization payment, and the term of his spousal support payments. Pellerin, acting in person, provided brief oral submissions but did not file a factum or address the appellant’s specific arguments.
The appeal focused on the treatment of funds loaned to Robson by his mother. The trial judge found that the date of separation and valuation date was August 4, 2016. Robson claimed $508,000 as the debt owed to his mother on the valuation date, comprised of $53,000 advanced before the marriage and $455,000 advanced after the marriage but before separation. The trial judge determined that the $455,000 received post-marriage was traceable into the matrimonial home and cottage, and that while the funds were loans at the time advanced, all debt was forgiven upon the mother’s death on May 3, 2015, prior to the valuation date. As a result, the trial judge valued the debt as zero in the calculation of Robson’s net family property at the valuation date.
Robson argued that the trial judge erred in finding the loans were forgiven and in discounting their value to zero. The Court of Appeal found no palpable and overriding error in the trial judge’s findings, confirming the approach was consistent with established jurisprudence.
On the issue of post-separation adjustments, Robson contended he should have been credited for half of $155,945.08 in inheritance funds deposited into the parties’ joint account after separation. The trial judge credited Robson for certain amounts that benefited Pellerin exclusively—$46,500 for her TFSA and $13,394 for a vehicle purchase—but declined to credit him for the remainder, finding the funds were used primarily for joint expenses. The Court of Appeal agreed that Robson was entitled to credit for 50 percent of the balance, granting him an additional post-separation credit of $48,025.54.
The Court rejected Robson’s remaining grounds of appeal, including further post-separation expenses and the commencement date for spousal support. The trial judge’s findings that Robson’s continued exclusive occupation of the matrimonial home and cottage offset any claimed expenses, and that the ten-year period for spousal support properly commenced when Pellerin moved out on June 25, 2018, were upheld.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed the appeal in part, granting an additional post-separation credit but otherwise upholding the trial judge’s decision. No order for costs was made.
