Law360 Canada ( June 20, 2025, 2:47 PM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant husband from trial judge’s decisions on unjust enrichment, spousal support and the admission of fresh evidence. The appellant appealed against his wife, the respondent, regarding the equalization of assets and spousal support following their separation after a 24-year marriage. The parties were married but eventually got separated. During their marriage, they developed an organic crop farm on land owned by the respondent’s family. The respondent received shares of the farming corporation as a gift from her parents, which included the farm property and what became the matrimonial home. During separation, the amount of land farmed had expanded to 187 acres. The appellant contributed to the farming operations but was not involved in the ownership arrangement. The trial judge found that there was a clear intention to grant the shares solely to the respondent as a sort of early inheritance. The appeal arose out of the final order made by the trial judge regarding the equalization of the parties’ assets and spousal support. The appellant raised three main issues on appeal: the adequacy of the equalization payment in addressing unjust enrichment, the sufficiency of the spousal support awarded, and the trial judge’s refusal to admit fresh evidence regarding the farm’s appraisal. The trial judge found that the appellant had a valid claim for unjust enrichment due to his contributions to the farm. However, it was determined that a monetary award was sufficient to remedy this, as the farm was no longer a going concern, and the equalization payment adequately addressed the unjust enrichment....