Yurchuk v. Yurchuk, (1976) 2 A.R. 277 (CA)

• Judge: McGillivray, C.J.A., Moir and Morrow, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: November 10, 1976
• Citations: (1976), 2 A.R. 277 (CA)

Yurchuk v. Yurchuk (1976), 2 A.R. 277 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Yurchuk v. Yurchuk

Indexed As: Yurchuk v. Yurchuk

Alberta Supreme Court

Appellate Division

McGillivray, C.J.A., Moir and Morrow, JJ.A.

November 10, 1976.

Summary:

This case arose out of actions by a wife against her husband for divorce and for an accounting of company shares and dividend income held by the husband for the wife's benefit. The claim for an accounting was with regard to company shares which the husband alleged had been given by the wife to himself when they were arranging their affairs upon termination of their marriage. The husband alleged that in return for conveyance of the matrimonial home to the wife, the wife gave the shares to him. The only evidence in support of the gift was the wife's statement to her husband on various occasions that "you can keep your fucking shares ...". No formal transfer of the shares was made on the company's records and a document clearly negatived the claim that the transfer of the house was consideration for the gift. Further, the wife paid income tax on dividends from the shares. The Alberta Supreme Court, Trial Division, dismissed the wife's action for an accounting and held that the husband owned the shares. The wife appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. The Alberta Court of Appeal held that no transfer of the shares to the husband ever took place, that the wife owned the shares and that the husband held the shares and income from them in trust for the wife - see paragraphs 6 to 8. The Alberta Court of Appeal ordered the husband to pay $96,250.00 to the wife as funds due to her respecting the shares.

The Alberta Court of Appeal denied the wife a lump sum settlement for maintenance in the divorce action, because her success on the action for an accounting in effect gave her a lump sum award - see paragraph 12. The Alberta Court of Appeal did not award periodic maintenance to the wife - see paragraph 13.

Family Law - Topic 4010

Divorce - Corollary relief - Maintenance - Periodic payments - The Alberta Court of Appeal awarded maintenance of $150.00 a month for the benefit of a daughter until she reached the age eighteen or for such longer period as she sought an education or until such shorter time as she became employed - See paragraph 13.

Family Law - Topic 4028

Divorce - Corollary Relief - Maintenance - Factors affecting maintenance award - Net worth of spouse - The wife brought an action for divorce and an action for an accounting of money received for her benefit against her husband - The wife succeeded in the action for an accounting and was declared to be the owner of valuable shares in a company, which shares the husband was declared to hold as trustee for her - The husband was ordered to pay to the wife $96,250.00 as funds due to her respecting the shares - In the divorce settlement the wife received the matrimonial home - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that by succeeding in the action for an accounting against her husband the wife in effect received a lump sum maintenance award and the Court of Appeal refused such an award in the divorce action - See paragraph 12 - The Court of Appeal did not award periodic maintenance to the wife - See paragraph 13.

Gifts - Topic 852

Gifts inter vivos - Validity of transfer of shares of company stock - When a husband and wife were terminating their marriage, the husband claimed that the wife gave certain company shares to him in return for conveyance of the matrimonial home - His wife told him several times that "you can have your fucking shares", as long as she got the house - The settlement agreement, however, made clear that the transfer of the house was not consideration for the transfer of the shares and no formal transfer ever took place on the company's records - At the husband's insistence the wife paid tax herself on the dividends from the shares - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that no transfer ever took place, that the wife owned the shares and that the husband held the shares and income from them in trust for the wife - See paragraphs 6 to 8.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 6025

Trusts - Actions against trustee - By beneficiary - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the Statute of Limitations was inapplicable to a claim by a beneficiary against a trustee - See paragraph 9.

Trusts - Topic 2101

Resulting trusts - Where property is transferred to one person and the purchase price is paid by another person - A company wanted to invest in two hotel companies, but doubted its corporate power to do so - Instead, the company loaned funds to two of its shareholders, who bought shares in the hotel companies - The purchase money was transferred directly from the company to the hotel companies - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the company owned the shares in the hotel companies and that the shares were held in trust for the company by the two shareholders - See paragraph 12.

Trusts - Topic 6081

The trustee - Duty to account - The Alberta Court of Appeal found that a husband held shares and income in trust for his wife and that as trustee he had a duty to account to his as beneficiary - See paragraph 5.

Statutes Noticed:

Divorce Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. D-8, sect. 11(1).

Limitation of Actions Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. 209 [para. 9].

Counsel:

Howard Rubin, for Eunice Yurchuk;

W.J. Shymko, for John Yurchuk.

This case was heard before McGILLIVRAY, C.J.A., and MOIR and MORROW, JJ.A., of the Alberta Supreme Court, Appellate Division.

On November 10, 1976, MOIR, J.A., delivered the following judgment of the Appellate Division: