Taylor Estate v. Stiles, (2004) 224 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (SC)

• Judge: Tidman, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: June 21, 2004
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2004), 224 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (SC);2004 NSSC 124

Taylor Estate v. Stiles (2004), 224 N.S.R.(2d) 139 (SC);

 708 A.P.R. 139

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. JL.013

The Estate of Eva Smith Taylor, by its Executor and trustee, Earl Ronald Edgar Best (plaintiff) v. Frank Leslie Stiles (defendant)

(S.AM. 190791; 2004 NSSC 124)

Indexed As: Taylor Estate v. Stiles

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Tidman, J.

June 21, 2004.

Summary:

Taylor loaned Stiles $100,000 interest free. Stiles did odd jobs and chores for Taylor. Taylor made a will leaving her whole estate to Stiles and told him the loan was an advance on his inheritance. Taylor later changed her will to leave nothing to Taylor. Stiles made some payments on the loan. Taylor died. Her estate sued Stiles for the proceeds from the loan ($95,700). Stiles argued that the loan was a gift as Taylor forgave the loan. Alternatively, he counterclaimed for payment for services rendered to Taylor during her lifetime on the basis of quantum meruit or unjust enrichment.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court granted judgment to the estate and dismissed the counterclaim.

Gifts - Topic 502

Gifts inter vivos - General principles - Intention required - Taylor loaned Stiles $100,000 interest free - Stiles did odd jobs and chores for Taylor - Taylor made a will leaving her whole estate to Stiles and told him the loan was an advance on his inheritance - Taylor later changed her will to leave nothing to Taylor - Stiles made some payments on the loan - Taylor died - Her estate sued Stiles for the proceeds from the loan ($95,700) - Stiles argued that the loan was a gift as Taylor had forgiven the loan - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court granted judgment to the estate - Although Taylor told Stiles that the loan was an advance on his inheritance, she changed her mind - There was no forgiveness of the loan - See paragraphs 32 to 53.

Restitution - Topic 64

Unjust enrichment - General - Juristic reason for enrichment - Taylor loaned Stiles $100,000 interest free - Stiles had received and paid off other smaller interest free loans - Stiles did odd jobs and chores for Taylor - Taylor made a will leaving her whole estate to Stiles and told him the loan was an advance on his inheritance - Taylor later changed her will to leave nothing to Taylor - Taylor did not pay Stiles for his work, except on an odd occasion and in small amounts - Stiles made some payments on the loan - Taylor died - Her estate sued Stiles for the proceeds from the loan ($95,700) - Stiles counterclaimed for payment for services rendered to Taylor during her lifetime on the basis of quantum meruit or unjust enrichment - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the counterclaim - There existed no contract, either express or implied, between the parties, that Stiles' favours were to be paid for - Any enrichment of Taylor was not unjust - There was a juristic reason for the enrichment - Taylor also enriched Stiles by providing interest free loans with exceptionally low repayments - See paragraphs 32 to 53.

Restitution - Topic 784

Benefit acquired from the plaintiff - Recovery based on quantum meruit - Work performed or goods provided - [See Restitution - Topic 64 ].

Cases Noticed:

McKenna Estate, Re (1994), 134 N.S.R.(2d) 218; 383 A.P.R. 218 (Prob. Ct.), refd to. [para. 43].

Kelly Estate, Re (1996), 141 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 356; 443 A.P.R. 356; 1996 CarswellPEI 128 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 55].

Currie v. Shields Estate (1993), 112 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 291; 350 A.P.R. 291 (P.E.I. T.D.), refd to. [para. 58].

Cleveland v. Gillis Estate (1986), 74 N.S.R.(2d) 406; 180 A.P.R. 406 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 58].

Bollivar v. Hirtle Estate (1990), 97 N.S.R.(2d) 247; 258 A.P.R. 247 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 63].

Counsel:

Dufferin R. Harper and Janine Kerr, for the plaintiff;

Douglas B. Shatford, Q.C., for the defendant.

This action and counterclaim were heard at Amherst, N.S., on May 25-27, 2004, before Tidman, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who released the following decision on June 21, 2004.