Pettkus v. Becker

SCCInfoBox
case-name=Pettkus v. Becker
full-case-name=Lothar Pettkus v. Rosa Becker
heard-date=June 23, 1980
decided-date=December 18, 1980
citations= [1980] 2 S.C.R. 834
SCC=1980-1982
Majority=Dickson J.
JoinMajority=Laskin C.J. and Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard and Lamer JJ.
Concurrence=Ritchie J.
Concurrence2=Martland J.
NotParticipating=
LawsApplied=

"Pettkus v. Becker" [1980] 2 S.C.R. 834 was a landmark family law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court established the requirements for a constructive trust in a common law relationship separation.

Background

Rosa Becker and Lothar Pettkus were together in a common law relationship for 19 years. Over this period Pettkus and Becker together ran a successful beehive operation. When the relationship fell apart Becker attempted to claim half of the beehive business. She claimed that since her income went towards supporting Pettkus while he got his beehive business off the ground, and she physically contributed to the operation for 14 years, she was entitled to a share in the business. In the alternative, she argued that there was a constructive trust of the assets which belonged to her on the basis of unjust enrichment.

Reasons of the Court

Dickson set out three requirements for finding a constructive trust. There must be 1) an enrichment; 2) a corresponding deprivation; and 3) the absence of any juristic reason for the enrichment. In this case, Dickson found that the requirements were satisfied and held that Becker was entitled to half the assets. He held that:"where one person, in a relationship tantamount to spousal, prejudices herself in the reasonable expectation of receiving an interest in property, and the other person in the relationship freely accepts benefits conferred by the first person in circumstances where he knows or ought to have known of that reasonable expectation, it would be unjust to allow the recipient of the benefit to retain it."

Aftermath

After the ruling in Becker's favour, Pettkus avoided paying out the money owed. When Pettkus' assets were finally liquidated, Becker's lawyer took most of the share, and left her with nothing. In a tragic turn of events, Becker committed suicide on November 5, 1986. The suicide note accused the legal system of forcing her to do it.

Since the ruling many provinces have added legislation that recognizes common law relationships when dividing assets.

ee also

* "Murdoch v. Murdoch" a similar controversial matrimonal property case.

External links

*