Finally, the court must determine under s. 5(6) whether the equalization is unconscionable. The s. 5(6) analysis would be the last opportunity for judicial discretion to bring flexibility into the process. This step should be kept distinct from earlier determinations of ownership. See Rawluk v. Rawluk, 1990 Cars, 1990 CanLII 152 (SCC), [1990] S.C.J. No. 4.
"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.