FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 2,970 times | Saved to 491 briefcases
Peter v Beblow, [1993] 1 SCR 980 (Link)


Ms. Peter and Mr. Beblow were in an intimate relationship. Lived in Beblow’s house. Peter acted as stepmother, took care of children, domestic chores. (Beblow used to have maid).


Can we impose a constructive trust?


There are no obligations for services between common law spouses.


Peter’s services were not a gift - court says it’s unreasonable to presume that love implies a gift.

Quote: “The cock bird can feather his nest precisely because he is not required to spend most of his time sitting on it.”


Yes - court says Beblow has attained unjust enrichment from Peter’s services.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.