Sherrington v. Arbuckle

Sherrington v. Arbuckle

On the balance of probabilities the Adjudicator found the ring was unconditionally given to Ms. Arbuckle on April 22, 2016 and was not validly pledged as security; the $6000 was an agreement to contribute toward expenses rather than a loan, of which Ms. Arbuckle had paid $3086 leaving $2914 owing, and the counterclaim for wedding expenses, motorcycle loan repayment and equipment return failed for lack of sufficient evidence; the ring remains vested in the Trustee in Bankruptcy so no delivery order was made.

Citation
2017 NSSM 20
Parties
Claimant / Defendant by Counterclaim: Devin Sherrington; Defendant / Claimant by Counterclaim: Lauren Arbuckle
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court Matter / Decision (adjudicator's Judgment)
Outcome
Claim allowed in part: judgment for Claimant in amount $2914; remainder of Claim dismissed; entire Counterclaim dismissed; each party to bear own costs; engagement ring remains vested with Trustee in Bankruptcy; no prejudgment interest awarded.
Legal Topics
Engagement Ring Conditional Gift, Loan Dispute / Contribution, Division of Wedding Expenses, Possession and Delivery of Personal Property, Assignment in Bankruptcy / Stay, Prejudice Interest and Costs
Source Language
English
Contract Property Family Law Bankruptcy Tort Engagement Ring Conditional Gift Loan Dispute / Contribution Division of Wedding Expenses +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devin Sherrington

Claimant / Defendant by Counterclaim

Lauren Arbuckle

Defendant / Claimant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court Matter / Decision (adjudicator's Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Ownership of engagement ring
  2. 2 Whether $6000 was a loan or contribution and amount owing
  3. 3 Whether engagement ring was given as security/collateral

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Adjudicator found the ring was unconditionally given to Ms. Arbuckle on April 22, 2016 and was not validly pledged as security; the $6000 was an agreement to contribute toward expenses rather than a loan, of which Ms. Arbuckle had paid $3086 leaving $2914 owing, and the counterclaim for wedding expenses, motorcycle loan repayment and equipment return failed for lack of sufficient evidence; the ring remains vested in the Trustee in Bankruptcy so no delivery order was made.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part: judgment for Claimant in amount $2914; remainder of Claim dismissed; entire Counterclaim dismissed; each party to bear own costs; engagement ring remains vested with Trustee in Bankruptcy; no prejudgment interest awarded.

Orders

  • Devin Sherrington shall have judgment against Lauren Arbuckle in the amount of $2914.
  • The balance of the Claim is dismissed.