After a 23-year unmarried cohabitation, the appellant challenged a trial judgment that found the respondent had been unjustly enriched through her child care, household management, financial contributions, and work in the family business.
The Court of Appeal upheld the finding that the appellant was enriched, the respondent suffered a corresponding deprivation, and there was no juristic reason for the enrichment.
It also upheld a remedial award that effectively increased the respondent's asset position by $170,000 through property transfers and cash, finding the result fell within the generous ambit of reasonableness in long-term domestic unjust enrichment cases.
The respondent's cross-appeal seeking a 50 percent share of total assets was dismissed.
