Is there a compelling reason to entertain the "occupation rent" claim made by the petitioner against the respondent?

In this latter regard, the respondent has made claim for retroactive spousal support and, as will be seen in that later analysis, courts are directed to take a “holistic” view, including taking into consideration to what extent the spouse claiming retroactive spousal support would have already received similar advantages to that of spousal support (See: Kerr v. Baranow 2011 SCC 10 at para. 212). As a result, there is a compelling reason to entertain the “occupation rent” claim made by the petitioner, so as to assess the overall fairness of the respondent’s compensation in the post separation period and, if necessary, to assist in making any required adjustments.