Article on Kerr v Baranow in the Conveyancer and Property Lawyer

My commentary on the decision of the Canadian Supreme Court in Kerr v Baranow has just appeared (‘The constructive trust: from common intention to relationship? Kerr v Baranow’[2011] Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 515 – 521). The judgment in Kerr looks at the use of unjust enrichment as a way of allocating rights in the assets of a ‘joint family venture’. The nature of the relationship between the co-habitees and the role of that relationship in improving the family’s balance sheet are central elements of the analysis. The article contrasts this approach with the use of the common intention constructive trust in England. It asks whether, despite the differences in approach between the two jurisdictions, there is evidence of convergence? After Stack, can it be said that the nature of the relationship between the parties (especially in its financial aspects) plays an important role in reaching a conclusion as to the ‘common intention’?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: