Chohan v. Chohan

Chohan v. Chohan

The plaintiffs failed to rebut the statutory presumption of indefeasible title under s.23(2) and failed to establish an enforceable pooling agreement or the elements of resulting or constructive trust or unjust enrichment; contemporaneous documents and conduct show the parties intended equal registered ownership and a long-standing joint family enterprise providing a juristic reason to deny equitable relief; the defendants' counterclaim for oppressive conduct and punitive/aggravated damages and specific corporate recoveries was unproven or unparticularized and is dismissed; Milman J.'s buyout mechanism in the Oppression Proceeding remains the appropriate corporate remedy.

Citation
2024 BCSC 420
Parties
Plaintiff: Kulbir Chohan; Plaintiff: Kulwant Chohan (deceased); Defendant: Sukhdev Chohan; Defendant: Hardeep Kaur Chohan; Defendant by Way of Counterclaim: River Nursery Ltd.; Defendant by Way of Counterclaim: River Nursery 2018 Ltd.
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Action Concerning Title, Trusts, Unjust Enrichment and Corporate Oppression / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Both the plaintiffs' claim and the defendants' counterclaim are dismissed; registered one‑third interests of Sukhdev and Hardeep remain; corporate buyout mechanism previously ordered by Milman J. is confirmed and to proceed as directed.
Legal Topics
Express Trust, Resulting Trust, Constructive Trust, Indefeasible Title S.23 Land Title Act, Oppression Remedy, Remedies and Buyout, Certainty Requirement for Contracts Respecting Land
Source Language
English
Property Law Equity and Trusts Corporate Law Unjust Enrichment Real Property/land Title Express Trust Resulting Trust Constructive Trust +4 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kulbir Chohan

Plaintiff

Kulwant Chohan (deceased)

Plaintiff

Sukhdev Chohan

Defendant

Hardeep Kaur Chohan

Defendant

River Nursery Ltd.

Defendant by Way of Counterclaim

River Nursery 2018 Ltd.

Defendant by Way of Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Civil Action Concerning Title, Trusts, Unjust Enrichment and Corporate Oppression / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an alleged oral 'pooling agreement' created an enforceable express trust over Prince George properties and/or the Nursery Property
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiffs rebutted the s.23 Land Title Act presumption of indefeasible title by proving resulting or constructive trust or unjust enrichment
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' counterclaim for oppressive conduct, punitive and aggravated damages and specific corporate recoveries is made out

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiffs failed to rebut the statutory presumption of indefeasible title under s.23(2) and failed to establish an enforceable pooling agreement or the elements of resulting or constructive trust or unjust enrichment; contemporaneous documents and conduct show the parties intended equal registered ownership and a long-standing joint family enterprise providing a juristic reason to deny equitable relief; the defendants' counterclaim for oppressive conduct and punitive/aggravated damages and specific corporate recoveries was unproven or unparticularized and is dismissed; Milman J.'s buyout mechanism in the Oppression Proceeding remains the appropriate corporate remedy.

Court Disposition

Both the plaintiffs' claim and the defendants' counterclaim are dismissed; registered one‑third interests of Sukhdev and Hardeep remain; corporate buyout mechanism previously ordered by Milman J. is confirmed and to proceed as directed.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed
  • Counterclaim dismissed