40:
391:
397:
273:
Following the
Supreme Court decision, Irene Murdoch started a new proceeding, a petition for divorce. In the divorce proceedings, she was found to be entitled to a lump-sum award of $ 65,000 from James Murdoch, in place of monthly spousal maintenance.
269:
publicized the case across the country. The outcry against the decision contributed to substantial reforms to matrimonial property laws across the country, giving husbands and wives equal rights to property acquired during the course of the marriage.
235:
upheld the trial judge's finding that the wife's labour was not beyond what was normally expected of a ranch wife. Martland J. held that since there was no financial contribution nor intention to create a trust, there could be no
223:
Irene
Murdoch, the wife of an Albertan rancher, submitted a claim for half the interest in the family ranch that was registered under the husband's name. The question put before the Court was whether there was an implied
216:
where the Court denied an abused ranch wife any interest in the family ranch. This case is most notable for the public outcry it created at the time and for what many believe is
258:
Laskin's dissent proved to be among his most famous. Many scholars, himself included, believed that his dissent was a major factor in his unexpected promotion to
94:
No intention to create a trust in favour of the wife, who did not contribute to the finances in a way other than what was common for a ranch wife.
440:
459:
469:
474:
17:
464:
247:
In dissent, Laskin J. argued that the Court did not need to examine intent in order to find a trust; rather a
433:
479:
231:
In a 4-1 decision, a majority of the Court dismissed the wife's application. Speaking for the majority,
426:
259:
213:
45:
198:
138:
414:
372:
321:
8:
248:
186:
107:
71:
39:
345:
237:
232:
212:, also known as the Murdoch Case, was a controversial family law decision by the
157:
118:
410:
190:
169:
165:
161:
134:
126:
122:
114:
453:
406:
390:
252:
84:
Application for division of matrimonial property under trust law dismissed.
225:
217:
194:
179:
142:
130:
266:
228:
on behalf of the wife for all her years of labour on the ranch.
310:. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Education Canada Inc. p. 178.
201:
took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
322:"Murdoch v. Murdoch and family property law in Canada"
373:
Murdoch v. Murdoch and family property law in Canada.
451:
65:Irene Florence Murdoch v James Alexander Murdoch
301:
299:
434:
296:
305:
441:
427:
368:
366:
308:Counterpoints: Exploring Canadian Issues
306:Cranny, Michael; Moles, Garvin (2001).
14:
452:
363:
240:, relying on a similar English case,
384:
220:'s most famous dissenting opinion.
24:
25:
491:
395:
389:
38:
351:
335:
314:
284:
13:
1:
460:Supreme Court of Canada cases
277:
413:. You can help Knowledge by
27:Supreme Court of Canada case
7:
54:Hearing: 22, 23 March 1973
10:
496:
470:Canadian property case law
383:
475:1973 in Canadian case law
185:
175:
153:
148:
103:
98:
93:
88:
80:
70:
60:
53:
37:
32:
465:Canadian family case law
56:Judgment: 2 October 1973
293:, (1973) 1 S.C.R. 423.
214:Supreme Court of Canada
46:Supreme Court of Canada
262:several years later.
187:Chief Justice Fauteux
139:Louis-Philippe Pigeon
405:This article about
480:Canadian law stubs
358:Murdoch v. Murdoch
342:Gissing v. Gissing
249:constructive trust
242:Gissing v. Gissing
18:Murdoch v. Murdoch
422:
421:
344:A.C. 886 (H.L.),
291:Murdoch v Murdoch
209:Murdoch v Murdoch
205:
204:
33:Murdoch v Murdoch
16:(Redirected from
487:
443:
436:
429:
401:
400:
399:
398:
393:
385:
375:
370:
361:
355:
349:
339:
333:
332:
330:
328:
318:
312:
311:
303:
294:
288:
255:could be found.
233:Justice Martland
112:Puisne Justices:
99:Court membership
42:
30:
29:
21:
495:
494:
490:
489:
488:
486:
485:
484:
450:
449:
448:
447:
396:
394:
388:
381:
379:
378:
371:
364:
356:
352:
340:
336:
326:
324:
320:
319:
315:
304:
297:
289:
285:
280:
238:resulting trust
158:Ronald Martland
119:Ronald Martland
110:
55:
49:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
493:
483:
482:
477:
472:
467:
462:
446:
445:
438:
431:
423:
420:
419:
402:
377:
376:
362:
360:, pp. 437-439.
350:
334:
313:
295:
282:
281:
279:
276:
218:Justice Laskin
203:
202:
183:
182:
177:
173:
172:
170:Wishart Spence
166:Roland Ritchie
162:Wilfred Judson
155:
151:
150:
146:
145:
135:Wishart Spence
127:Roland Ritchie
123:Wilfred Judson
115:Douglas Abbott
108:GĂ©rald Fauteux
105:Chief Justice:
101:
100:
96:
95:
91:
90:
86:
85:
82:
78:
77:
74:
68:
67:
62:
61:Full case name
58:
57:
51:
50:
43:
35:
34:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
492:
481:
478:
476:
473:
471:
468:
466:
463:
461:
458:
457:
455:
444:
439:
437:
432:
430:
425:
424:
418:
416:
412:
408:
403:
392:
387:
386:
382:
374:
369:
367:
359:
354:
347:
343:
338:
323:
317:
309:
302:
300:
292:
287:
283:
275:
271:
268:
263:
261:
260:Chief Justice
256:
254:
250:
245:
243:
239:
234:
229:
227:
221:
219:
215:
211:
210:
200:
196:
192:
189:and Justices
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
171:
167:
163:
159:
156:
152:
149:Reasons given
147:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
113:
109:
106:
102:
97:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
73:
69:
66:
63:
59:
52:
48:
47:
41:
36:
31:
19:
415:expanding it
407:Canadian law
404:
380:
357:
353:
341:
337:
325:. Retrieved
316:
307:
290:
286:
272:
264:
257:
246:
241:
230:
222:
208:
207:
206:
160:, joined by
111:
104:
76:1 S.C.R. 423
64:
44:
180:Bora Laskin
143:Bora Laskin
131:Emmett Hall
454:Categories
278:References
267:feminists
265:Canadian
251:based in
72:Citations
327:11 March
154:Majority
176:Dissent
89:Holding
346:UKHL 3
253:equity
199:Pigeon
197:, and
191:Abbott
81:Ruling
409:is a
226:trust
411:stub
329:2011
195:Hall
456::
365:^
298:^
244:.
193:,
168:,
164:,
141:,
137:,
133:,
129:,
125:,
121:,
117:,
442:e
435:t
428:v
417:.
348:.
331:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
