The deceased, who had a history of mental illness, executed a trust agreement placing her inherited property in trust for her life, with the remainder to her mother's grandchildren.
Her brothers, who were the trustees, had initiated the legal consultation.
After her death, her son challenged the trust agreement on the basis of undue influence.
The trial judge found no actual undue influence and upheld the agreement.
The Court of Appeal reversed, applying a presumption of undue influence.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that while the relationship gave rise to a presumption of undue influence, the trial judge's finding of fact that no influence was actually exerted rebutted the presumption.
The Court also clarified that 'manifest disadvantage' is not required to trigger the presumption in cases of gifts or bequests.
