Albert and Albert v. Albert and Albert, (1981) 33 N.B.R.(2d) 689 (TD)

• Judge: Abbis, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick (Canada)
• Case Date: February 25, 1981
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: (1981), 33 N.B.R.(2d) 689 (TD)

Albert v. Albert (1981), 33 N.B.R.(2d) 689 (TD);

    33 R.N.-B.(2e) 689; 80 A.P.R. 689

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

Albert and Albert v. Albert and Albert

Indexed As: Albert and Albert v. Albert and Albert

Répertorié: Albert and Albert v. Albert and Albert

New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench

Trial Division

Judicial District of Edmundston

Abbis, J.

March 5, 1981.

Summary:

Résumé:

This headnote contains no summary.

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 801

Undue influence - Presumed undue influence - Rebuttal of - General - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that in the circumstances there was a presumption of undue influence in the giving of a deed by an old couple to their son - The court held that the presumption of undue influence could be rebutted only by proof that the old couple gave the deed as a result of an independent and informed judgment - The court held that the presumption was not rebutted, where the old couple had no independent advice and did not understand what they were doing when they made the conveyance.

Fraud and Misrepresentation - Topic 824

Undue influence - Presumed undue influence from special relationship - Adult child and elderly parent - An old and infirm couple were induced by their son to convey their real property to him in return for his support for their lives - The old couple challenged the deed, when they felt that the son did not live up to his obligations - The evidence showed that the old couple had no independent advice and did not know what they were doing when they executed the deed - The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, held that the deed was void - The court held that there was a presumption of undue influence in the transaction, which the son failed to rebut.

Cases Noticed:

Boyne v. McGovern, [1955] 3 D.L.R. 65 (N.B.C.A.), appld. [para. 17].

Inche Noriah v. Omar, [1929] A.C. 127, appld. [para. 17].

Zed v. Zed (1980), 28 N.B.R.(2d) 580; 63 A.P.R. 580, appld. [para. 19].

Counsel:

Paul E. Pelletier, Q.C., for the plaintiffs;

Francois Angers, for the defendants.

This case was heard on February 25, 1981, at Edmundston, N.B., before ABBIS, J., of the New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, Judicial District of Edmundston, who delivered the following judgment on March 5, 1981: