“Although not specifically provided for in the Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, this court has jurisdiction to award an advance against equalization: Zagdanski v. Zagdanski, 2001 CanLII 27981, at paras. 22-38.
Before such an advance is ordered, I should consider the following:
a. Whether there is little or no realistic chance that the amount of the contemplated advance will exceed the ultimate equalization amount;
b. Whether there is some considerable degree of certainty about the right to, and likely minimum amount of, an equalization payment;
c. Whether there is a reasonable requirement for the funds in advance of the final resolution of the equalization issue, including funds to enable the continued prosecution or defence of the action; and
d. Whether there are other circumstances such that fairness requires some relief for the moving party, such as a delay in the action, deliberate or not, prejudicing the moving party by, for example, running of their costs.
See Zagdanski, at para. 39; Firestone v. Pfaff, 2012 ONSC 4909, at para. 24.”