Law360 Canada ( February 11, 2026, 9:36 AM EST) -- Appeal by the appellant from trial judgment ordering unequal division of property and support order in a family law case. The parties agreed to equal division of much of their family property, except for the increase in value of the shares of some companies through which the respondent ran his businesses (“the companies”). The parties agreed to the value of the companies at the beginning of the relationship and a subsequent date sometime after separation. The judge found the respondent was hardworking and the appellant made only minor contributions to the companies as her focus was primarily on running the family’s domestic life. The issues raised were whether the judge erred in reapportioning the increase in the value of certain family property during a marriage-like relationship 75 per cent in favour of the respondent on the basis that the presumptive equal division of the increase in value between the parties would be significantly unfair; and whether the judge erred in making a final order that required the repayment of support that was ordered to be paid on an interim basis pending trial. The appellant stated that the judge erred in his application of the principles governing the division of the increase in the value during a relationship of property that was excluded property at the start of the relationship. She also argued that in ordering repayment of support “retroactively,” the judge failed to account for the economic hardship imposed on her by his order and his imputation of income to her....