Simon looking earnest in Preveza, Greece

SimonShields@isp.com

Online Lawyer (Ontario)

Legal Guides
tenant / small claims / welfare (ontario works) / odsp / human rights / employment / consumer /
collection agencies / criminal injuries compensation / sppa (admin law) / animal cruelty / dogs & cats / wild animal law (all Canada)

home / about / *NEW GUIDE IDEAS* / testimonials / Conditions of Use

Are Debt Collectors After You?


THE LATEST WORD
... what's this?

Trusts - Henson Trusts
Declarations - Criteria
S.A. v. Metro Vancouver Housing Corp. (SCC, 2019)

Equity - Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Equity - Laches

Equity - Remedies
Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Equity - Proprietary Estoppel

Equity - Unjust Enrichment - Piercing the Corporate Veil


Equity - Gifts

Equity - Unjust Enrichment


Equity - Proprietary Estoppel

Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Equity - Issue Estoppel

Equity - Relief from Forfeiture

Equity - Knowing Receipt of Trust Funds

Equity - Unjust Enrichment - Unconscionability

Equity - Constructive Trust - Embezzlement

Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Equity - Equitable Set-off - Elements

Equity - Equitable Set-off - Where Limitation Period Inapplicable

Equity - Laches

Equity - Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Damages

Equity - Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Remedies - Knowing Assistance of Third Party Actionable

Equity - Resulting Trust

Equity - Unjust Enrichment



Equity - Proprietary Estoppel

Equity - Resulting Trust

Equity - Relief from Forfeiture

Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Equity - Unjust Enrichment



Trusts - Constructive Trust

Equity - Unjust Enrichment

Moore v Sweet (SCC, 2018)

--------------------


Trusts - Elements
Trusts - Statutory
The Guarantee Company of Canada v. Royal Bank of Canada (Ont CA, 2019)


Trust - Essential Elements


Trusts - Resulting Trust - Purchase Money Resulting Trust


Trusts - Constructive Trust
Equity - Unjust Enrichment
Moore v Sweet (SCC, 2018)


===== TRUSTS

---------------------- Trusts / resulting trust

Korman v. Korman, 2015 ONCA 578 (CanLII)

----------------------- Trusts / leading unjust enrichment case

- the two-part analysis of the absence of juristic reason provided for in Garland v. Consumers’ Gas, 2004 SCC 25 (CanLII), [2004] 1 S.C.R. 629.

------------------ Equity / unjust enrichment

- The Supreme Court of Canada recently discussed the elements of unjust enrichment in Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), 2012 SCC 71 (CanLII), [2012] 3 S.C.R. 660

------------------------------------------ TRUSTS

- In Moge v. Moge, 1992 CanLII 25 (SCC), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 813, the court established the compensatory model of support. This was followed by Bracklow v. Bracklow, 1999 CanLII 715 (SCC), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 420, which formally recognized compensatory, non-compensatory, and contractual entitlements to support.

- Kerr v Baranow (SCC, 2011): In this case the Supreme Court of Canada sets out a comprehensive review of the legal status of unmarried spouses on separation, in the course of which it states key doctrine applicable generally to resulting trusts [paras 12-29] and unjust enrichment [paras 30-]. The case essential reading for anyone involved in such issues.

- Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Canada; Peel (Regional Municipality) v. Ontario, 1992 CanLII 21 (SCC): unjust enrichment





Law Society Number #37308N / Website © Simon Shields 2005-2019