Canada Case Law

Oranchuk v. Oranchuk

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Although the plaintiff conferred some benefit and suffered a corresponding deprivation, the court found a juristic reason for the enrichment in the implied reciprocal arrangement exchanging labour for accommodation and, alternatively, that the plaintiff's expectations were unreasonable; further, the claim was barred by laches because of long acquiescence and delay. The unjust enrichment claim was dismissed and no constructive trust was imposed.

Source excerpt

• Unjust enrichment
• Constructive trust
• Laches / acquiescence
• Implied contract (labour for accommodation)
• Credibility and evidence

Read case analysis

Tam Estate

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The application to remove the executor was dismissed because the delays and conduct did not meet the established grounds for removal (no endangerment, dishonesty, incapacity, or want of reasonable fidelity proven), the testator's appointment should be respected and the majority of beneficiaries support the executor, and remaining administrative tasks are limited and capable of completion by the current executor; however, the executor must produce specified documents relating to the joint account to allow inquiry into potential estate claims.

Source excerpt

• Removal of executor
• Appointment of substitute executor
• Production of documents
• Passing of accounts
• Joint account presumption
• Tax/clearance certificate

Read case analysis

Holman v. Holman

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The October 17, 2024 settlement offer for $500,000, which expressly articulated the successful theory that certain trust distributions were unpaid, was a reasonable offer that should have been accepted; accordingly the defendant Lyle must pay the plaintiff's costs from October 17, 2024, assessed as party-and-party costs at Scale B. The earlier February 2, 2024 offer was not sanctionable because it lacked substantive rationale and was not unreasonably rejected.

Source excerpt

• Offer to settle
• Rule 9-1(5) costs sanctions
• Allocation of trust distributions
• Settlement negotiations
• Party-and-party costs

Read case analysis

Forrest v. Forrest

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The trial judge erred in law by treating part of the Richmond proceeds as family property because the appellant held no beneficial interest until sale (resulting trust presumption), which means the Mission Property net proceeds are excluded property; the judge also erred by deducting family mortgage debt from excluded property without s.96 analysis, by awarding retroactive spousal support without applying Kerr factors, and by making a palpable and overriding error in valuing certain chattels; the prospective spousal support determination and income finding were not disturbed.

Source excerpt

• Division of family property
• Excluded property
• Resulting trust
• Reapportionment of family property
• Spousal support
• Retroactive support

Read case analysis

Bilin v. Sidhu

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Applying Rule 14-1(3) and related authority, the registrar concluded that defendant Hardip's repeated disclosure failures, lack of candour and fabricated/reconstructed evidence unjustifiably lengthened the litigation and warranted special costs. The registrar allowed special costs for the action through assessment but applied a small reduction to the amount claimed to account for fees potentially attributable to appearances for which costs were not awarded or for appeals. The proper award after assessment was $260,000 inclusive of disbursements, taxes and assessment costs, and the registrar d…

Source excerpt

• Promissory note
• Resulting trust
• Special costs
• Disclosure and discovery
• Certificate of pending litigation
• Costs assessment

Read case analysis

Moghari v. Dolatshah

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The appeal was dismissed as abandoned because the appellants did not demonstrate a bona fide intention to prosecute the appeal (they failed to take necessary steps or promptly inform the respondent), the respondent would be prejudiced by delay (loss of possession, rental income and risk of tax sale), the appeal had little prospect of success given factual and credibility-based findings at trial and underdeveloped legal argument, and the interests of justice favored dismissal rather than granting an extension or stay.

Source excerpt

• Constructive trust
• Abandonment of appeal
• Extension of time
• Stay applications
• Prejudice from delay
• Credibility and deference to trial findings

Read case analysis

Yinghe Investment (Canada) Ltd. v. Liu

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court concluded the New Oppression Petition duplicates and substantially overlaps prior litigation and, given prior adjudications (including Warren J.'s dismissal and the effective dismissal by Matthews J. of the Strata Ownership Action subject to reconsideration/appeal), constituted an abuse of process and res judicata as against CCM, Run Guo and Xin Liu and must be struck; the New Action was stayed pending resolution of the Strata Ownership Action reconsideration and appeal, but Mr. Chen's distinct Management Fee Claim was allowed to proceed because it is a separate personal contractual…

Source excerpt

• Oppression remedy (s.227 bca)
• Abuse of process
• Res judicata
• Issue estoppel
• Cause of action estoppel
• Limitation periods

Read case analysis

Malik v. Malik

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The photograph of the signed 'OWNERSHIP AGREEMENT' is admissible fresh evidence under the Palmer criteria; the trial judge committed an error of law by effectively requiring proof of subjective intention rather than an objective inquiry into intention to create a trust; admission of the new document warrants setting aside the trial orders and ordering a new trial limited to the trust claim so that the effect and weight of the ownership agreement can be determined.

Source excerpt

• Express trust
• Certainty of intention
• Fresh evidence (palmer test)
• Admission of documentary evidence on appeal
• Land owner transparency registry

Read case analysis

Stingelin Estate v. Woods

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an estate trustee’s appeal from summary judgment, holding the respondent lawyer owed no duty or fiduciary duty and the claim was time-barred.

• Duty of care
• Fiduciary duty
• Causation
• Discoverability under limitations act
• Summary judgment
• Will drafting

Read case analysis

Satguru Ram Singh Satsang Charitable Foundation v. Akalirai

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court found the gift valid because the donor initiated and pursued the donation, received independent legal advice with a signed certificate confirming understanding, there was no unlawful threat or compulsion, and the evidence of third-party pressure was not credible or sufficient to establish duress; therefore the deed of gift and transfer are effective and irrevocable.

Source excerpt

• Gift deed
• Duress
• Undue influence
• Capacity
• Independent legal advice
• Parens patriae

Read case analysis