However, the presumption of resulting trust is rebuttable by the transferee. If the transferee is able to prove that the transferor intended the transfer to be a true gift, the presumption of resulting trust is rebutted and the transfer is considered to be a gift. This principle was succinctly stated by Laskin J. in Goodfriend v. Goodfriend, 1971 CanLII 28 (SCC), [1972] S.C.R. 640 at 646: It is, of course, trite law, and has been since Dyer v. Dyer [(1788), 2 Cox 92, 30 E.R. 42], that where a person transfers his property into another’s name gratuitously a resulting trust in favour of the grantor is created and the transferee must prove, in order to retain title, that a gift was intended by the transferor. ...
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.