There would be no issue in the proposed appeal as to whether the master’s order is a final order. This was a finding of Madam Justice Gerow that is not in dispute. Madam Justice Gerow noted that the order provided that the property was not subject to division in that it was not a family asset. Accordingly, and relying upon Radke v. M.S. (Guardian ad litem of) (2006), 49 B.C.L.R. (4th) 82, 2006 BCCA 12, she held that the issue determined by the order “would have been a substantive part of the trial” and was a final order.
"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.