Counsel for the respondent submitted that either the chalet exists as it does now due to the respondent's effort and he should benefit from increases in its value, or the increased market value is due to market forces and not to any causal nexus with the applicant. Hapichuk v. Hapichuk [1988] O.J. No. 466; Sorochan v. Sorochan 1986 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1986] 2 SCR 38 at para. 30.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.