Blog

Does s. 12 of British Columbia's Limitation Act apply to remedial constructive trust claims? With recent BC Supreme Court decisions reaching opposite conclusions, the answer remains uncertain.

In Kirkwood Estate v. Whitefield, 2026 BCSC 1265, the BC Supreme Court considered the legal effect of mortgage gift letters in disputes between family members. The Court held that while a gift letter may be binding as against mortgage lenders and other creditors, it is not necessarily determinative of a donor's true intention for the purpose of rebutting the presumption of resulting trust. The decision provides important guidance for families contributing to home purchases and underscores the importance of carefully documenting intentions when advancing funds.

Canadian courts have consistently ruled that a gift made by cheque fails if the cheque is not deposited and cleared before the donor’s death, regardless of how clear or well‑intentioned the gift may have been. Because a cheque does not transfer money until it is paid, the funds remain part of the estate if death intervenes, often leading to unexpected outcomes and disputes. The cases discussed highlight why informal, last‑minute gifts can be risky and underscore the importance of proper estate planning to ensure intentions are carried out.

In Cusack v. Cusack, the BCSC clarified the post-Tom v. Tang framework for assessing whether the disinheritance of an adult child is justified. The Court found that, although the plaintiff’s estrangement from her father during childhood was not her fault, because she later reconciled with her father and then chose to become estranged again, this subsequent estrangement was found to negate her father’s moral obligations toward her and to justify her disinheritance.