C.S.K. v P.K.: Family Violence Shifts Property Division
Canadian courts have increasingly prioritized the recognition and handling of family violence within family law disputes. In 2022, Ontario introduced a significant development by acknowledging a new tort of family violence, allowing those impacted by domestic violence to claim financial compensation from their abusers. This shift in perspective is mirrored across other provinces, which are showing heightened sensitivity to domestic violence issues when resolving family law cases.
In British Columbia, the legal presumption upon the dissolution of a marriage or marriage-like relationship is that each spouse receives an equal share of family property. However, should this equal division be deemed significantly unfair, courts can adjust the allocation to favor one party.
A notable case that highlights this adjustment is C.S.K. v P.K., 2025 BCSC 1728, where the Supreme Court of British Columbia ruled in favor of a wife receiving 75% of the family residence due to experienced family violence and the subsequent economic disadvantage she faced.
The marriage in this case, begun in 1998, included three children and involved the acquisition of a family home, a key asset. The relationship ended in 2018, following a violent incident that brought criminal charges against the husband. The wife sustained severe injuries, leading to prolonged cognitive and physical challenges.
Before the violence, the wife had worked in a managerial position at a grocery store. Post-assault, she was unable to continue working and received long-term disability. The court found her permanently disadvantaged in terms of income ability, with no likelihood of returning to work, largely due to the husband's assault.
While the need for spousal support was evident, it was not ordered due to the husband's low income. Instead, the court recognized the wife's economic disadvantage by deciding on an unequal division of property, preventing significant unfairness.
The calculated economic disadvantage amounted to $320,000, reflecting a 25% share of the family home's equity. Thus, the court awarded an additional 25% of the home's equity to the wife, totalling 75%.
This ruling underscores the legal acknowledgment that loss of earning capacity from family violence is a compensable economic disadvantage. It highlights that unequal division of property can rectify the imbalance caused by such disadvantages. Essentially, the court upheld the principle that significant injustice must be corrected in property division in family law.
It will be interesting to see how courts in Alberta respond to domestic violence, and if they will follow the same trend in B.C. of compensating a victim through unequal property division.
If you have questions or need assistance navigating family law matters, Mint Legal is here to help. Reach out to learn more about how we can support you.
