Murdoch v. Murdoch
Encyclopedia
Murdoch v. Murdoch [1975] 1 S.C.R. 423 was controversial decision by the Supreme Court of Canada
where the Court denied an abused farm wife any interest in the family farm. This case is most notable for the public outcry it created at the time and for what many believe is Bora Laskin
's most famous dissenting opinion.
Irene Murdoch, the wife of an Albertan farmer, submitted a claim for half the interest in the family ranch that was registered under the husband's name. The question put before the Court was whether there was an implied trust on behalf of the wife for all her years of labour on the farm.
The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the wife's labour was not beyond what was normally expected of a ranch wife and that since there was no financial contribution thus based on the English case of Gissing v. Gissing [1971] A.C. 886 there could be no resulting trust
.
In dissent, Laskin J. claimed that the Court did not need to examine intent in order to find a trust; rather a constructive trust
based in equity could be found.
Laskin's dissent proved to be among his most famous. Many scholars, himself included, believed that his dissent was a major factor in his unexpected promotion to Chief Justice
several years later.
Canadian feminists publicized the case across the country. In 1973, Irene Murdoch was paid her claim. It is thought that the case helped bring changes to family law in Canada.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
where the Court denied an abused farm wife any interest in the family farm. This case is most notable for the public outcry it created at the time and for what many believe is Bora Laskin
Bora Laskin
Bora Laskin, PC, CC, FRSC was a Canadian jurist, who served on the Supreme Court of Canada for fourteen years, including a decade as its Chief Justice.-Early life:...
's most famous dissenting opinion.
Irene Murdoch, the wife of an Albertan farmer, submitted a claim for half the interest in the family ranch that was registered under the husband's name. The question put before the Court was whether there was an implied trust on behalf of the wife for all her years of labour on the farm.
The Court upheld the trial judge's finding that the wife's labour was not beyond what was normally expected of a ranch wife and that since there was no financial contribution thus based on the English case of Gissing v. Gissing [1971] A.C. 886 there could be no resulting trust
Resulting trust
A resulting trust is the creation of an implied trust by operation of law, as where property gets transferred to one who pays nothing for it; and then is implied to have held the property for benefit of another person. The trust property is said to "result" back to the transferor...
.
In dissent, Laskin J. claimed that the Court did not need to examine intent in order to find a trust; rather a constructive trust
Constructive trust
A constructive trust is an equitable remedy resembling a trust imposed by a court to benefit a party that has been wrongfully deprived of its rights due to either a person obtaining or holding legal right to property which they should not possess due to unjust enrichment or interference...
based in equity could be found.
Laskin's dissent proved to be among his most famous. Many scholars, himself included, believed that his dissent was a major factor in his unexpected promotion to Chief Justice
Chief Justice of Canada
The Chief Justice of Canada, like the eight puisne Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, is appointed by the Governor-in-Council . All nine are chosen from either sitting judges or barristers who have at least ten years' standing at the bar of a province or territory...
several years later.
Canadian feminists publicized the case across the country. In 1973, Irene Murdoch was paid her claim. It is thought that the case helped bring changes to family law in Canada.