Originally held on June 6, 2011, the archived teleseminar is now available for purchase either as an audio stream with downloadable link to materials; or on CD-Rom (audio archive with program materials).

New Teleseminars from OPD! Just grab your lunch, dial in by phone, listen and learn. These Teleseminars will provide you with the information you need to know now, with the flexibility of joining the session from work, home or anywhere that there is telephone connection. Simultaneous presentation of materials will be provided online (when available).

Landmark Family Law Decision on
Unjust Enrichment Claims and Remedies

Kerr v. Baranow; Vanasse v. Seguin, Supreme Court
of Canada

Panellists
Lawrence A. Kahn, Q.C., Kahn Zack Ehrlich Lithwick LLP, Richmond, BC
Susan G. Label, Susan G. Label Law Corporation, Richmond, BC
H. Hunter Phillips, MacKinnon & Phillips, Ottawa
D.A. Rollie Thompson, Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University, Halifax

Moderator
Aaron Franks, Epstein Cole LLP, Toronto

It is not often that the Supreme Court hears a family law case.  Rarer still is a decision in which the court revisits core principles of family law jurisprudence.  But that is precisely what the SCC has done in the joint hearing of Kerr v. Baranow (out of BC) and Vanasse v. Seguin (out of Ontario).  In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court took the opportunity to thoroughly reexamine the equitable remedies of unjust enrichment and resulting trusts frequently used to determine compensation claims between unmarried couples. The Court also made significant findings about how to determine both the form and quantum of the remedy in such cases – overruling the Ontario CA in the process.  A thorough understanding of this decision is absolutely essential for anyone practicing family law in Canada.

An expert panel, including counsel who litigated the case, will explain the decision and its significance for family law practitioners.  You will learn about:

• Background on the use of unjust enrichment and resulting and constructive trusts
• The elimination of the common intention resulting trust
• The nuances of the re-vamped test for unjust enrichment in the family law context
• What is the concept of a “joint family venture”, and how does it fit into the Court’s approach to unjust enrichment claims upon separation?
• The newly enunciated approach to the question of monetary vs. property remedy, and the new rules for how to value the claimant’s remedy
• How the Court dealt with “setting off” reciprocating benefits
• Tips for negotiation and pleading in light of the new approaches
• The pregnant silence: important things the Court didn’t  say

OPD Program Lawyer

Ken Jepson

kjepson@osgoode.yorku.ca