Quinn v. Quinn, 2026 ONSC 3748 Case Overview: Quinn v. Quinn is a 2026 Ontario Superior Court family law decision addressing whether a separation agreement - and specifically a spousal support waiver (Miglin-style release) should be set aside years after execution. The case is also notable because it provides one of Ontario’s rare modern analyses of the non-suit motion in Family Law. Core Legal Issues: The court considered four questions: What is the legal test for a non-suit

R.L. v. M.F., 2025 ONCA 595 Case Overview: R.L. v. M.F. is a significant Ontario Court of Appeal decision on high-income spousal support, clarifying that even a high-earning recipient spouse may remain entitled to support where the marriage created economic interdependence and enabled the payor’s exceptional earning capacity. The appeal focused primarily on entitlement, quantum, duration of support, and prejudgment interest on equalization. Core Facts: Parties were married fo

Turner v. Ross, 2026 ONSC 3592 Case Overview Turner v. Ross is a notable Ontario family law decision addressing an unusual but increasingly common issue: pet ownership disputes after separation. The court had to determine who legally owned a cat, Harrold, after all other family law issues (property, support, parenting) had already been settled. Core Facts: Kevin Turner and Robin Ross separated after a 14-year marriage and share a 14-year-old son, Xander. The only unresolved

In R. v. Francis, 2026 ONSC 2888, the Ontario Superior Court considered whether MAF participated in a violent altercation at a Toronto Community Housing building on February 17, 2024, in which JB sustained a serious laceration to his hand. MAF was charged with: assault causing bodily harm, assault with a weapon, and breaching probation by failing to keep the peace. The Crown’s case relied almost entirely on CCTV footage and circumstantial evidence. The video showed: JB ap

In Harris v. Kirby, 2026 ONSC 2536, the Ontario Superior Court resolved several unresolved family law issues between former common-law spouses AH and RK concerning: ownership of a Brampton property, retroactive child support, treatment of investment income, and private school tuition expenses for their two children. The parties had cohabited for approximately nine years and had two children together. Justice Agarwal ruled that: AH held a 50% beneficial interest in the Hogan

In Razavi v. Golzari, 2026 ONSC 2686, the Ontario Superior Court addressed a dispute over equalization of net family property following the breakdown of a difficult seven-year marriage between SR and AG. The central issue was not the calculation itself, but whether the wife should receive any equalization payment at all. The husband argued that: The marriage was merely one of convenience, The parties functioned only as roommates or landlord/tenant, and that equalization wou

CASE SUMMARY: Anyanwu v. Anyanwu, 2026 ONSC 980 Overview This Ontario family law decision concerns competing motions regarding the matrimonial home following the separation of a married couple with three children. The father (Respondent) sought permission to move back into the matrimonial home and establish a 50-50 parenting arrangement. The mother (Applicant) sought exclusive possession of the home. The court also addressed the father’s conduct in litigation, ultimately find

Fournier v. Giannousopoulos, 2026 ONSC 2813 Facts KF and MG were common-law spouses and parents of twin daughters. The family lived in a home on Squires Avenue in Toronto, which was legally owned solely by K. After their separation in November 2024, M remained in the home while K moved out and continued to pay all mortgage, tax, insurance, and utility expenses. K sought an order requiring M to vacate the property and allowing her to sell it because: She could no longer afford

Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16 In Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized, for the first time, a new common law tort of intimate partner violence (IPV). The case arose from a 16-year marriage characterized by severe abuse, including physical violence, emotional abuse, intimidation, humiliation, isolation, financial control, sexual coercion, and patterns of coercive and controlling behaviour by the husband toward the wife. During divorce proceedin

In Razavi v. Golzari, 2026 ONSC 2686, the Ontario Superior Court examined whether a wife was entitled to an equalization payment after the breakdown of a challenging seven-year marriage. The husband contended that, despite their legal marriage, they functioned more like roommates or landlord-tenant equivalents. He argued that equalization under Ontario’s Family Law Act should not apply. Additionally, he claimed that a handwritten 2019 document constituted an agreement alterin

In Bistron v. Soni, 2026 ONSC 2567, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice addressed a child support dispute between unmarried parents who shared parenting of their five-year-old child under a longstanding 2-2-3 parenting arrangement. Although the parties had already resolved most parenting issues through a Parenting Agreement, they disagreed significantly over each parent’s income for child support purposes and whether certain payments, benefits, and forgone earnings should b

Summary of the decision In Watson v. Zita, 2026 ONSC 2466, released April 24, 2026, the case concerns child support for a child, J.Z., whose mother died in January 2024. The applicant is the child’s maternal aunt and has been the child’s primary caregiver since January 2023. The respondent father had already consented to primary parenting to the applicant by consent order, so the remaining issue was mainly the amount of child support he should pay. The respondent’s Answer h

When someone benefits unfairly at your expense, the law steps in to restore balance. This principle, known as unjust enrichment, plays a crucial role in Ontario’s legal system. If you find yourself in a situation where another party has gained something without a valid legal reason, understanding unjust enrichment remedies in Ontario can help you protect your interests and seek fair compensation. Unjust enrichment is not just a legal term; it’s a concept that affects real peo