The existence of a de facto relationship does not of itself give rise to a constructive trust over property; a constructive trust depends on the circumstances relevant to the creation of an interest in the specific property, not the mere existence of the relationship. Accordingly, caveats lodged on the basis of a de facto relationship alone may not be well-founded, and their existence does not preclude the grant of a freezing order. The case also provides a practical illustration of the factors relevant to inferring danger of dissipation, including forgery and the establishment of separate corporate vehicles excluding the other party.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 59 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 59 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.