Schrader v. Schrader: When a Separation Agreement Fails

Author: SiLaw Group Family Lawyers
Published: Aug 10, 2026

---

A separation agreement is supposed to bring closure. You negotiate, you sign, and you move on. But in British Columbia, a signed agreement is not always the end of the story. The Court of Appeal's decision in Schrader v. Schrader, 2025 BCCA 50, released February 19, 2025, shows what can happen when the numbers behind an agreement turn out to be wrong.

The facts in brief

Tyler Schrader and Cynthia Klyne were together for more than two decades. They began living together in 1993, married in November 2003, and separated on September 1, 2014. There were no children of the marriage (para. 6). In January 2019, Ms. Klyne filed a family claim asking for an equal division of family property and for spousal support (para. 8).

On May 10, 2021, the couple signed a separation agreement. Ms. Klyne would receive $200,000 for her interest in the family home in Maple Ridge, and both spouses released any future claims to property division and spousal support (paras. 9–10). Neither of them ordered a current appraisal first. They worked from older figures: a 2019 joint appraisal at $600,000, assessments near $700,000, and Mr. Schrader's own sworn financial statement listing the home at $730,000 (para. 42). The trial judge found the parties had built the deal on a value of about $750,000 (para. 54).

Then the market spoke. Just twelve days after signing, Mr. Schrader listed the home for $1,249,000. On September 28, 2021 — four months after the agreement — it sold for $1,180,000 (paras. 11, 42).

What the courts decided

Ms. Klyne applied to set the agreement aside, and the trial judge agreed (2023 BCSC 2254). The judge found no problem with how the agreement was made. There was no duress, no hidden information, and no legal mistake. But under the Family Law Act, a BC court can also set aside an agreement that is significantly unfair in its result, even if it was made properly. That is what happened here. In words the Court of Appeal later endorsed, "certainty disappears when the foundation for the Agreement turns out to be inaccurate" (quoted at para. 54).

The trial judge ordered a fresh division of property. Mr. Schrader still received a $141,600 credit for the value he added by removing a grow operation from the home before the sale (paras. 41, 55). After the judge corrected a calculation error in a follow-up ruling (2024 BCSC 460), Mr. Schrader owed Ms. Klyne a further $166,852.67 for her share of the home, in addition to the $200,000 she had already received under the agreement (paras. 67–69). The judge also ordered spousal support of $658 per month, plus a retroactive award (paras. 21–22).

Mr. Schrader appealed. The Court of Appeal upheld almost everything. It made only one change: retroactive spousal support for 2022 had to be based on Mr. Schrader's actual income for that year, not the year before. That reduced the net retroactive award from $85,018 to $66,436 (paras. 30–31). The court confirmed that the trial judge was entitled to treat the gap between the assumed value and the real sale price as significant unfairness, even in a hot real estate market (paras. 56–61).

The practical lesson for separating spouses

Schrader offers several takeaways for anyone negotiating a separation agreement in BC.

Get a current appraisal before you sign. The single biggest problem in this case was a stale number. Old appraisals, tax assessments, and bank estimates are not the same as today's market value. If a major asset like the family home is being divided, a fresh professional appraisal is a modest cost compared to years of litigation.

"Full and final" has limits. BC law respects agreements, and the bar for setting one aside is high. But the law looks at two separate questions: whether the agreement was made fairly, and whether its outcome is significantly unfair (para. 60). An agreement can pass the first test and still fail the second.

Independent legal advice protects both sides. Ms. Klyne signed a waiver of independent legal advice and did not personally read the agreement (para. 13). The agreement was set aside on other grounds, but skipping advice adds risk for everyone. The spouse who keeps an asset also benefits when the other side signs with full understanding.

Timing matters. The home was listed less than two weeks after signing and sold four months later (para. 42). If a sale is likely soon after an agreement, the value used in the agreement should be as close to sale-ready as possible.

Support calculations should use real income. The one point Mr. Schrader won confirms that retroactive spousal support should be based on actual income earned in each year, once that income is known (paras. 26–29).

Read the decision

You can read the full judgment on the BC courts website: Schrader v. Schrader, 2025 BCCA 50.

If you are negotiating, reviewing, or questioning a separation agreement, our team can help you understand how BC's rules on property division apply to your situation. Book a free consultation to talk it through.

This post is legal information, not legal advice.