Karjala & Gallard

The parties to this proceeding were Karjala and Gallard, with the dispute concerning the validity and construction of a binding financial agreement (BFA). The applicants sought to set aside the BFA on various equitable and common law grounds, also raising questions about the court's jurisdiction to determine property issues. The matter came before Wilson J.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether it possessed jurisdiction to determine the property issues in dispute, and whether the BFA should be set aside. Further, the court was required to consider the construction of the BFA itself, given the factual and legal disputes surrounding its interpretation. A related question was whether it was desirable to try the issue of jurisdiction as a separate question, given the significant factual discrepancies present in most of the issues.

Wilson J held that the court must determine the facts that ground its own jurisdiction. Consequently, the court determined that it was not desirable to try the issue of jurisdiction as a separate question, particularly where there was a major factual discrepancy on most of the issues. Therefore, the court ordered that all issues be tried together.