Law360 Canada ( November 5, 2026, 9:47 AM EST) -- Appeal by appellant from the order granting the respondent summary judgment on her debt claim, and applications by both parties to adduce fresh evidence. During the appellant’s former relationship with the respondent’s son, the couple used advances from the respondent to finance residential property projects. A family trial judge found the advances were loans and family debt under the Family Law Act (FLA), and divided responsibility for them between the former spouses. In 2025, the respondent sued the appellant for the portion allocated to her and applied for summary judgment. The respondent submitted that the family debt order conclusively established the appellant’s direct liability and that the Limitations Act defence raised no genuine issue because the claim was not discoverable before that order. The appellant submitted that the family debt order operated only between the former spouses and that time began running earlier. The judge treated the order as an unrefuted basis for the debt, found the claim timely and granted summary judgment. On appeal, the appellant sought to have the debt claim struck or, alternatively, the summary judgment application dismissed. The appellant contended that the judge erred in law by concluding the family debt order gave the respondent a legal right to make a claim against her for the amounts apportioned to her as family debt, and said the judge made several reversible errors in concluding there was no genuine issue for trial with respect to her limitation defence. The parties also sought to tender documents and transcripts from the family trial....