3 total
The court declared a husband's cash transfers to his wife void as fraudulent conveyances, allowing a creditor to trace the funds into the wife's estate.
The plaintiff, Rosetta Conte, sought to enforce a 2010 default judgment against Gerald Pettle by claiming a beneficial interest in properties held by his deceased wife, Susan Pettle, and alleging fraudulent conveyance.
The court found no fraudulent conveyance of real property or resulting trust regarding the properties themselves, as they were always registered in Susan's name and Gerald did not contribute to the original purchase.
However, the court found that Gerald's cash transfers to Susan after the 2010 judgment constituted fraudulent conveyances of personal property under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act, intended to defeat creditors.
The court attributed $217,000 of unidentified funds in Susan's accounts to these fraudulent transfers and declared them void against the plaintiff, allowing execution against Susan's estate.
The claim was not statute-barred as the two-year limitation period for personal property fraudulent conveyances ran from discovery, which occurred within two years of the action's commencement.
A will challenge was dismissed because a notice of objection is not a legal proceeding.
The respondent moved to dismiss the applicant's application and notice of objection as statute-barred.
The applicant argued her prior filings constituted a "proceeding" within the limitation period or that she was self-represented and unaware of the need to issue an application.
The court found the limitation period began at the date of death or notice of objection, and that neither a notice of objection nor a notice of appearance constituted a "proceeding" under the Limitations Act, 2002.
The court also rejected the argument that the claims were solely for declaratory relief to avoid the limitation period.
The respondent's motion was granted, and the application was dismissed.
No costs were awarded due to the applicant's impecuniosity and the difficult result.
Interim dependant's support granted to widow for assisted-living costs despite marriage contract waiver.
The 89-year-old applicant widow moved into an assisted-living facility and sought interim dependant's support from her late husband's estate under the Succession Law Reform Act.
The deceased's will provided her a life interest in a residence, but did not contemplate her need for assisted living.
The respondent residual beneficiary opposed the motion, citing a marriage contract waiver.
The court granted interim support of $4,635 per month from the estate, finding the applicant was a dependant and the deceased's intention was to provide for her accommodation expenses.
