In Thiessen v. Thiessen Estate, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the Trustee Act’s two-year limitation period governs all claims against estates arising from the deceased’s actions, even when those claims involve real property (with limited statutory exceptions).
Background
The Plaintiff/Respondent was the husband of the Deceased. The Husband and the Deceased were married in 2014. Before they were married, each owned their own home. They decided that, after marrying, they would sell their homes and buy a new property together. They agreed that the property they purchased would be owned as tenants in common and funded equally by the sale of their respective homes. They formalized this plan in a marriage contract (the “Marriage Contract”). The Marriage Contract also provided that all real estate acquired before marriage would be the sole exclusive property of the owner.
However, they were unable to find a new home and agree to live in the Deceased’s home (the “Property”). The Husband sold his home and deposited $223,000.00 into their joint account. On that same day, the Deceased gave her children $100,000.00 (half the estimated value of the Property). The Husband claims that the deposit of the sale proceeds of his home into the joint account and the cash payment out to the Deceased’s children secured him a 50% interest in the Property. However, title to Property remained in the Deceased’s name alone and the Marriage Contract was never amended.
On January 26, 2022, The Deceased died. The Husband was given a conditional life interest in the Property in her will. Upon the termination of the conditional life interest, the Deceased’s interest in the home passes to her children.
On April 19, 2024, the Husband commenced an action against his late wife’s estate (the “Estate”), seeking dependent support and a 50% beneficial ownership interest in the Property as well as a damages claim against the Estate. The Defendants/Appellants (the “Estate Trustees”) argued that he was out of time to bring his claims against the Estate.
On September 9, 2024, the Husband’s claim for dependent support was dismissed as statute-barred. In October 2024, the Estate Trustees brought a Rule 21 motion to determine whether, the Husband claim to a 50% interest in the Property was also statute-barred.
The Motion Judge’s Decision
The motion judge held that the Husband’s claim for damages was statute-barred and governed by s. 38 of the Trustee Act (which requires that all claims against an estate be commenced within two years of the Deceased’s death). However, the Husband’s constructive trust claim could go forward as his action was governed by s. 4 of the Real Property Limitations Act, (“RPLA”), which allows an “action to recover any land” to be brought within ten years of the claimant’s right to the land.
The Estate Trustees appealed the motion judge’s finding. They argued that the two-year limitation period of the Trustee Act governed, rather than the 10-year limitation period of the RPLA.
The Appeal
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal on the limitation issue and rejected the motion judge’s finding that the 10-year limitation period of the RPLA applied to the Husband’s action. The Husband’s action was statute-barred under s. 38(3) of the Trustee Act. Section 38(2) of the Trustee Act captures all actionable wrongs for which the deceased may be liable for. The Husband’s claim arises from the Deceased’s actions and not from the actions of the Estate Trustees.
The Court of Appeal went on to explain that the exceptions to the two-year limitation period under the Trustee Act are expressly set out in the RPLA and do not apply to the Husband’s action. Further, the Court of Appeal also noted that equitable trust claims are subject to the two-year limitation period. Finally, the Court of Appeal referenced that the purpose of s. 38 of the Trustee Act was to encourage timely administrations of estates and provide some certainty to trustees Costs are to be decided.
Thanks for reading
