The respondent acknowledges that he should have an asset attributed to him under this heading, but not in the amount suggested by the petitioner. The respondent says that in order for him to use the net capital loss, he must have the ability to complete a transaction that results in a capital gain. Given his financial position at and since that time, he says the possibility that he could use the capital loss is fictional. He relies upon the decision of Menzies J. in Golletz v. Nieradka, 2011 MBQB 289. In that case, a similar claim was made that a capital loss carry forward should carry some value and be assessed as part of the family property accounting. The family property trial occurred seven years after separation, and the husband had been unable to take advantage of the carry forward despite that passage of time. With no use having been made of the capital loss carry forward, Menzies J. found that it had a nil value.
"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.