Trusts and Guarantee Co. v. Hart

Trusts and Guarantee Co. v. Hart

Majority held that on the facts the donor repeatedly manifested and acted on his intention over a long period (note given 1889, renewed 1895, payment and deposit arrangement 1898), the trial judge’s findings that the donor fully understood and acted freely were supported by evidence and thus the presumption of undue influence was rebutted; parent‑child/principal‑agent relations do not attract as conclusive a presumption as solicitor‑client, so the gift stands.

Citation
(1902) 32 SCR 553
Parties
Appellant (plaintiffs): The Trusts and Guarantee Company, Administrators of the Estate of James Hart; Respondent (defendant): George D. Hart; Respondent (defendant): Standard Bank of Canada; Respondents (infants, Added Parties at Trial): James D. Hart; George P. Hart; Lloyd Hart
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 November 1902
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Concerning Gifts/undue Influence/trusts / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment Rendered
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario restoring the trial judgment in favour of the respondents affirmed.
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Gifts, Confidential Relationship, Parent and Child, Principal and Agent, Constructive Trust, Evidence, Public Policy
Source Language
English
Trusts Equity Contract Agency Family Law Banking Undue Influence Gifts +6 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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Trusts and Guarantee Company, Administrators of the Estate of James Hart

Appellant (plaintiffs)

George D. Hart

Respondent (defendant)

Standard Bank of Canada

Respondent (defendant)

James D. Hart; George P. Hart; Lloyd Hart

Respondents (infants, Added Parties at Trial)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Concerning Gifts/undue Influence/trusts / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for Ontario; Final Judgment Rendered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a large inter vivos gift from a father to his son who managed the father’s business is void for undue influence given the confidential relationship and absence of independent advice
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of undue influence applicable to solicitor‑client and similar fiduciary relations applies equally to parent‑child or principal‑agent relations
  3. 3 Whether the promissory notes and their renewal plus the subsequent deposit constitute sufficient evidence of the donor’s independent and repeated intention to make a gift for the benefit of grandchildren

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that on the facts the donor repeatedly manifested and acted on his intention over a long period (note given 1889, renewed 1895, payment and deposit arrangement 1898), the trial judge’s findings that the donor fully understood and acted freely were supported by evidence and thus the presumption of undue influence was rebutted; parent‑child/principal‑agent relations do not attract as conclusive a presumption as solicitor‑client, so the gift stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario restoring the trial judgment in favour of the respondents affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Amount in dispute to be dealt with as directed by trial judge (money directed to be paid into court to the credit of the respondent children in equal shares)