Search by Category
- F - Bankruptcy 1
- F - Certificates of Pending Litigation 1
- F - Child Support 31
- F - Common Law 3
- F - Corporate Income 2
- F - Divorce 7
- F - Domestic Contract 7
- F - Domestic Violence 3
- F - Emergency Relief 1
- F - Equalization 4
- F - Equitable Remedy 1
- F - Exclusive Possession 2
- F - Family Responsibility Office 2
- F - Final Order 1
- F - Imputing Income 11
- F - Jurisdiction 1
- F - Limitation Periods 1
- F - Matrimonial Home 17
- F - Net Family Property 31
- F - Occupational Rent 4
- F - Pension 2
- F - Preservation 1
- F - Property 47
- F - Restraining 1
- F - Resulting Trust 3
- F - Retroactive Support 5
- F - Section 7 Expenses 7
- F - Spousal Support 27
- F - Standard Procedure 1
- F - Trust 1
- F-Certificate of Pending Litigation 1
- F-Decision-Making 6
- F-Exclusions 2
- F-Mobility 11
- F-OCL 1
- F-Parenting 37
- F-Parenting Time 11
- F-Preservation Orders 2
- F-Relocation 12
- F-Travel 2
- F-unjust enrichment 7
- Frequently Cited Cases 14
- Post-Separation Increases 1
The Importance of Certificates of Pending Litigation in Property Disputes
A Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) is a legal tool utilized in proceedings involving disputes over an interest in land. Often, its value isn't fully recognized or is understated; however, understanding its role and implications can be pivotal in safeguarding your interests. This blog post aims to delve into the authority that underpins a CPL, the implications it carries, and the risks that come with it. By doing so, we hope to shed light on the importance of a CPL in property disputes.
Property Preservation in Family Law
Section 12 of the Family Law Act empowers the court to issue Preservation Orders, which serve to restrict the depletion of a spouse's property and ensure its safekeeping. The purpose of these orders, as confirmed in Bronfman v. Bronfman, is to guarantee sufficient assets for an equalization payment once the amount is determined. The court, however, must balance three factors when considering such an order: the relative strength of the plaintiff's case, the balance of convenience, and the potential for irreparable harm.