In my view, that fact alone is not sufficient to establish unfairness. If it were, in every case where there has been delay between the date of separation and the triggering event, reapportionment would be required. The legislation specifically requires the post-separation accruals to be included in determining the proportionate share. To reapportion solely on the basis that there is a delay between separation and triggering event would defeat the purpose of the legislation. Unless there are factors coming within s. 65 of the Act that make it unfair, the pension benefits should be divided according to the Part 6 Act and the Regulation (see Shambrook v. Shambrook, 2004 BCSC 872).
"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.