In Bono v. Clark (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 1409, the Court held that " 'questions of fact concern the establishment of historical or physical facts; their resolution is reviewed under the substantial-evidence test.' " (Id. at p. 1421.) Therefore, a " 'trial court's finding that a particular item is separate or community property is limited to a determination of whether any substantial evidence supports the finding.' " (Ibid.) On the other hand, questions of law are subject to our independent review. (Ibid.) "In this case, we apply the substantial evidence standard to the trial court's factual findings as to the existence and character of the parties' property. By contrast, the trial court's determination of what legal principles apply is subject to our de novo review." (Ibid.) The Court held that "Laches may bar relief in equity to those who neglect their rights, where such neglect operates to the detriment of others. Given its nature as an equitable defense, however, there are recognized limits on application of the doctrine of laches. For one thing, the doctrine 'is not applied strictly between near relatives such as spouses.'More generally, 'laches is not technical and arbitrary and is not designed to punish a plaintiff. It can only be invoked where a refusal would be to permit an unwarranted injustice. Whether or not the doctrine applies depends upon the circumstances of each case.'' "The defense of laches requires unreasonable delay plus either acquiescence in the act about which plaintiff complains or prejudice to the defendant resulting from the delay." ''Laches implies that the plaintiff should have done something earlier.'Whether the plaintiff should have acted sooner depends on the circumstances of the particular case."