Equitable claims against an estate are a common recourse for disappointed common-law spouses, but Ontario courts strictly enforce limitation periods to ensure the timely administration of estates. A claimant cannot bypass a missed deadline simply by rebranding their cause of action.
Background: Kathleen and Patrick lived together in Kathleen’s home for ten years prior to her death in May 2023. Her will left Patrick 10% of the estate’s residue. Following her death, Patrick remained in the home without paying rent.
The estate trustee eventually commenced an application to evict Patrick and sell the property. Rather than responding directly, Patrick launched his own application in 2026, claiming part-ownership of the home based on the doctrine of promissory estoppel. He alleged that Kathleen had promised him a share of the sale proceeds and, relying on that promise, he had funded labour and material improvements to the property. The Estate moved to strike Patrick’s application, arguing it was statute-barred by the two-year limitation period, which began running on the date of Kathleen’s death.
Legal Issues: The primary issue was whether Patrick’s claim was subject to the strict two-year limitation period. The court had to determine if it was “plain and obvious” that the limitation period had expired, warranting the dismissal of his application.
Court’s Analysis and Resolution: The Ontario Superior Court of Justice struck Patrick’s application. The court found that Patrick was attempting to “plead around the jurisprudence and the statute by calling the claim something other than it clearly appears to be”.
Despite being framed as promissory estoppel, the court characterized the pleadings as an unjust enrichment, constructive trust, or breach-of-promise claim. The court confirmed that once a person passes away, equitable trust claims against their estate are governed by the Trustee Act, which imposes a strict two-year limitation period running from the date of death. Consequently, Patrick’s 2026 application was out of time.
However, the court preserved Patrick’s ability to use his asserted equities. While his standalone proprietary claim was statute-barred, the court ruled that he could still raise his financial contributions and reliance as a defence and potential set-off against the Estate’s outstanding claim for occupation rent.
In short, while an expired limitation period will definitively close the door on an independent equitable claim against an estate, those same equitable arguments may survive as a shield against claims brought by the estate itself.
Thanks for reading!
Osama Saleemi