The ex-husband will keep his Mercedes sports car and Ducati motorcycle, the ex-wife her luxury handbags.
Both will keep their Rolex collections.
So ruled a B.C. Supreme Court judge in the divorce case of a Burnaby couple this week “who enjoyed a lavish lifestyle that was beyond their means.”
“If their marriage had not broken down and had they remained together, they would have had to face the consequences of their excessive spending,” stated Justice Paul Walker Tuesday (Nov. 6).
The pair, now in their early 40s, eloped in Hawaii in 2006 and threw a $70,000 religious wedding soon after.
Her diamond ring cost him $25,000.
They bought a big house in Burnaby; their kids went to private school; they had a live-in nanny/housekeeper.
“(The husband) paid for all expenses to maintain his wife and children and their home, which for a time included a live-in nanny/housekeeper. He paid for renovations to their matrimonial home, luxury items such as their Mercedes-Benz vehicles, their respective Rolex watch collections, (the wife's) luxury handbags and jewellery, luxury vacations to Mexico, New York, the Dominican Republic, Hawaii and Europe, Canucks hockey and Whitecaps soccer season tickets, numerous dinners at local high-end restaurants, and their respective cosmetic surgeries and medical and dental procedures (including liposuction, body sculpting, and dental veneers),” stated Walker’s ruling.
Then they hit a “significant rocky patch,” Walker said.
“Each party provided different accounts of what caused their marital difficulties. (She) blamed it on (his) substance abuse and (he) on (her) uncontrolled spending,” wrote the judge.
The pair separated in November 2016.
There was no acrimonious custody battle, according to the ruling, but the division of the family assets, spousal support and child support was a different story, with the former couple squabbling about money throughout the trial.
She accused him of hiding assets and exaggerating their shared debts, some of which she said she didn’t find out about until the divorce proceedings, while he said she should have gone back to work long ago – even before they were separated.
In the end, Walker ordered them to sell their $2 million Burnaby house “forthwith” and divide the proceeds equally – with each paying the other out for things they wanted to keep, like the Mercedes, the Rolexes and the luxury handbag collection.
Walker said the woman was also entitled to $20,000 of her ex-husband’s $40,000 tax return as well as $95,000 on account of a condo owned by his business.
But a $1.2 million debt the man said his company owed to the third party was to be his alone, ruled the judge.
Based on documents and evidence presented by the ex-wife’s lawyer, Walker found the ex-husband likely did have assets beyond the $400,000 that he disclosed.
“I find on the balance of probabilities that it is at least $1.5 million and more likely the $1.947 million reflected in counsel’s analysis,” Walker said.
He also ruled the ex-husband’s income-earning ability was likely about $80,000 a year higher than he claimed.
His child- and spousal-support payments were assessed accordingly.
