Brighouse v. Morton

Brighouse v. Morton

The appeal is allowed: payments of $7,287.76 to discharge the bank loan were not monies received by the defendant after Feb 6, 1907 and in any event were expenditures in relation to the deceased's affairs and allowable; the $4,000 paid to the defendant's brother were allowable on the evidence as expenditures for wages and not shown to be proceeds misapplied; unidentified deposits totalling $1,661.10 cannot be surcharged because the deceased authorized and acquiesced in mingling funds and there is no proof the authority was revoked by insanity at the material time.

Citation
[1929] SCR 512
Parties
Defendant Appellant: Michael Wilkinson Brighouse; Plaintiff Respondent: Frederick C. Morton, Administrator of the Trust and one of the Executors and Trustees of the Estate of Sam Brighouse, deceased
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 April 1929
Procedural Posture
Trusts Accounting / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; Court of Appeal judgment reversed on the disputed items
Legal Topics
Accounting by Trustee, Surcharge for Mingled Funds, Corroboration in Claims Against Estate (evidence Act B.c. S.11), Authority and Revocation by Insanity, Allowable Expenditures by Trustee
Source Language
English
Trusts Equity Accounting Evidence Accounting by Trustee Surcharge for Mingled Funds Corroboration in Claims Against Estate (evidence Act B.c. S.11) Authority and Revocation by Insanity +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Wilkinson Brighouse

Defendant Appellant

Frederick C. Morton, Administrator of the Trust and one of the Executors and Trustees of the Estate of Sam Brighouse, deceased

Plaintiff Respondent

Procedural Posture

Trusts Accounting / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether payments by defendant to discharge a bank loan of the deceased were chargeable to the estate or allowable expenditures by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether payments to defendant's brother could be charged to the estate as wages absent independent corroboration and given alternative explanation as sale proceeds
  3. 3 Whether unidentified deposits in a mixed bank account must be presumed to belong to the estate where mixing was allegedly authorized by the deceased

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed: payments of $7,287.76 to discharge the bank loan were not monies received by the defendant after Feb 6, 1907 and in any event were expenditures in relation to the deceased's affairs and allowable; the $4,000 paid to the defendant's brother were allowable on the evidence as expenditures for wages and not shown to be proceeds misapplied; unidentified deposits totalling $1,661.10 cannot be surcharged because the deceased authorized and acquiesced in mingling funds and there is no proof the authority was revoked by insanity at the material time.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; Court of Appeal judgment reversed on the disputed items

Orders

  • Appeal allowed upon all disputed items
  • Costs to appellant throughout