Law360 Canada ( September 7, 2022, 5:45 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the defendant Singh from a trial judgment finding he was unjustly enriched and granting the respondent Virk a constructive trust over Singh’s property amounting to 70 per cent of the increase in the value of the property. Cross-appeal by Virk from the judge’s failure to find an express trust and, in the alternative, in setting the quantification of the constructive trust remedy too low. Singh, Virk and Virk’s former husband, were close friends. After a falling out with the husband, Singh claimed the husband owed him money. After the Virks’ marriage failed, Singh promised to give a property he owned to Virk in exchange for money he expected she would receive from a family law action he encouraged her to bring, and for her help with a lawsuit the husband had brought against him. Virk paid $230,000 to Singh and for many years lived in the property, paid some of the expenses, and maintained and improved it. Singh never gave her the property. The judge found Singh’s promise to give the property to Virk was a false one. She concluded there was insufficient evidence to find Singh intended to part with his beneficial interest in the property and thus there was no express trust. However, the judge concluded Singh was unjustly enriched. She accepted Virk used her settlement monies and virtually all of her income on the property, thus foregoing other financial opportunities. When quantifying the remedy, the judge determined the value survived approach was appropriate as it did not require the court to determine the exact value of the benefit Singh received. The judge concluded Virk’s relative contribution to the property was 70 per cent of the increase in value of the property during the relevant period....