The appellant's husband, while acting as an estate trustee, misappropriated millions of dollars from an estate and used the funds to purchase and renovate a luxury matrimonial home, placing title in the appellant's name.
The motion judge granted partial summary judgment against the husband, imposed a constructive trust on the home in favour of the estate, and issued a vesting order.
The appellant appealed, arguing she had contributed her own funds to the home and that the vesting order was improper.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that all funds for the home's purchase and renovation came from the misappropriated estate funds, the vesting order was a proper exercise of discretion under section 100 of the Courts of Justice Act, and any notional entitlement the appellant had to reimbursement was offset by the financial benefits of living rent-free in the home for a decade.
