Law360 Canada ( March 3, 2021, 6:21 AM EST) -- Appeal by the wife from a finding that a corporate-owned family residence was subject to an express trust in the wife’s favour and therefore a family asset. Cross-appeal by the husband for a larger share of the residence and the setting aside of an order directing him to bear 50 per cent of the residence’s expenses. Both also appealed orders determining and dividing other assets. The wife’s parents owned a seafood business consisting of the corporations BHIT, VIE and BHIS. Both spouses worked in the business during the marriage. BHIT purchased a residential home where the spouses resided until separation in 2012. BHIT paid the mortgage, property taxes and renovation and insurance costs. The trial judge determined the residence was the subject of an express trust in favour of the wife and should be apportioned equally between the spouses. The judge found that the wife’s father unambiguously told her and others that the house was being gifted to her. The trial judge found that the father’s goal in creating the trust was to protect his daughter’s interest in the house from claims by the husband but concluded he had failed in that objective because a trust property that would be a family asset if owned by a spouse was a family asset. The wife argued that the judge erred in finding that she was not entitled to a 50 per cent share of properties acquired by husband after trial....