Two recent decisions from the Supreme Court of British Columbia
illustrate the importance, and difficulty, of determining the
intentions someone who transfers property when ownership of that
property is later challenged. In Pavlovich v Danilovic,
2019 BCSC 153, Justice Iyer found that she could not determine the
intentions of a deceased father, concluding that his son held the
properties on resulting trust for the estate. In contrast, in
Iberg v. Claridge, 2019 BCSC 165, Justice Grauer was able
to determine the plaintiff mother's intentions, holding that
she did not intend to make a gift of certain funds to her son and
declaring that a property registered in his name was impressed with
a constructive trust.
