The respondent was a client of the appellant, a real estate broker.
The appellant negotiated to purchase a commercial building on behalf of the respondent.
The vendor rejected the offer and made a counteroffer.
The appellant rejected the counteroffer but signed it back.
The vendor advised the appellant of the amount it would accept.
Instead of conveying this information to the respondent, the appellant arranged for his wife to purchase the property, which was then transferred to the appellant and his wife.
The respondent sued for breach of fiduciary duty and sought a constructive trust over the property, abandoning his claim for damages because the property's market value had decreased.
The trial judge found a breach of duty but refused a constructive trust because there was no unjust enrichment.
The Court of Appeal reversed and ordered the property conveyed to the respondent.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that a constructive trust can be imposed for a breach of fiduciary duty even without unjust enrichment, based on good conscience, to ensure fiduciaries remain faithful.
