Law360 Canada ( December 11, 2024, 2:41 PM EST) -- Appeal by appellant from the trial judge's order dismissing his claim for a resulting trust and granting the respondents' claim for partition and sale of the property. The parties were three siblings and the estate of one sibling. The three respondents brought an application for an order of partition and sale of the property. The appellant countered with a claim for a resulting trust and asserted that he was the beneficial owner of the whole property. He also claimed credit for the value of services he provided in the property since its purchase. The trial judge dismissed the appellant's claim for a resulting trust, finding it statute-barred under the Real Property Limitations Act ("RPLA") and unsupported by corroborative evidence as required by the Evidence Act. The judge also found the appellant's evidence inconsistent and unreliable. Consequently, the judge granted the respondents' claim for partition and sale, noting no malice or vexatious intent on their part. The appellant's claim for equitable set-off for work done on the property was also dismissed as it was unrelated to the respondents' claim and statute-barred. On appeal, the appellant argued that the trial judge erred in reversing the burden of proof regarding the presumption of resulting trust, misinterpreting the Evidence Act, and incorrectly applying the RPLA's limitation period. He also contested the dismissal of his claim for compensation for work done on the property....