Law360 Canada ( April 28, 2026, 9:42 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellants (Satnam and Jaswinder) from the dismissal of their claim to a 50 per cent beneficial ownership interest in the Farwell Crescent property (Farwell). Satnam advanced $55,000 toward the down payment when Sukhvinder purchased Farwell, but the appellants were not placed on title. The appellants asserted they contributed half the purchase funds intending to acquire an equal beneficial interest in the home they all planned to share. The respondents maintained the $55,000 was repayment of unpaid wages owed by Satnam to Sukhvinder, as well as a prior loan, and therefore was not a gratuitous transfer capable of grounding a resulting trust. The judge accepted that the funds were advanced to satisfy a debt and dismissed the resulting trust claim. On appeal, the appellants argued the judge misunderstood the law of purchase money resulting trusts by failing to apply the evidential presumption, erred in discounting the evidence of realtor Nanda, relied on impermissible hearsay, and misapprehended the evidence concerning the alleged wage debt. The respondents argued the judge made no legal error, properly found the payment was for consideration, and that even if the presumption arose, it was rebutted. The issues were whether the presumption arose, whether the judge erred in treating Nanda’s evidence as irrelevant, and whether the appellate court should determine beneficial ownership on the existing record....