A contentious family dispute over a home in Sturgeon Falls, Ontario has been settled by the Superior Court of Justice, which ruled that a son who held legal title to his mother’s property was doing so in trust for her, and that the house rightfully belongs to her estate1. The decision, released on September 9, 2025, brings a chapter of uncertainty to a close for the Lajeunesse family, concluding that the late matriarch, Millie Lajeunesse, never intended to gift the home to her son but instead maintained control of it for estate planning purposes until her death.
The case revolved around the property at 50 Spring Street, which Millie and her husband Terrance Lajeunesse had owned as joint tenants since 1972. After Terrance’s passing in 2009, Millie became the sole owner of the family home. The legal complexities began the following year. In 2010, Millie transferred the house to her son, Gary Lajeunesse, for a nominal consideration of one dollar. The transaction was handled by a local lawyer. Gary maintained that this transfer came with a specific verbal agreement. He told the court his mother instructed him to sell the house after her death and divide the profits among his siblings. However, this plan included a provision for his brother, Arnold Lajeunesse, who had been living in the house since 2004. According to Gary, Arnold was to be given two months to use funds from the residue of Millie’s estate to find a new apartment before any sale could proceed. Gary explained that his mother was concerned about Arnold’s history with drug and alcohol problems and feared he would lose the house if it were transferred directly to him.
The property’s ownership history became more complicated in 2016. A second transfer was registered, this time moving the title from Gary’s sole name into a joint tenancy between himself and Millie. This legal arrangement meant that upon the death of one joint tenant, the other would automatically become the sole owner by right of survivorship. The same law firm handled this transaction. In court, Gary Lajeunesse made the surprising claim that this 2016 transfer was executed without his knowledge or participation.
As Millie’s health declined in 2022, she took further steps to organize her affairs. Her will, dated August 25, 2022, was drafted by a lawyer from the same firm that handled the property transfers. In it, she left her entire estate, save for a single portrait bequeathed to her daughter, to her son Arnold. On the very same day the will was signed, another significant event occurred at the Spring Street property. Millie allegedly summoned Gary to the house, where her lawyer was present with documents prepared to transfer the property to her granddaughter, Kasey Lajeunesse, for $1,500. Kasey, who is Arnold’s daughter, had recently moved into the home to help care for her father. Millie and Kasey had already signed the transfer documents. Gary stated he refused to sign, citing his mother’s deteriorating health, her distress over the proposed low sale price, and his commitment to her previous, calmer instructions to sell the home and divide the proceeds.
Just one month later, on September 25, 2022, Millie Lajeunesse passed away. Following her death, Gary, believing he was the rightful owner of the property through the right of survivorship from the 2016 joint tenancy, began taking steps to have Arnold, Kasey, and another grandson, Kirby, removed from the home so he could sell it. This prompted a response from Kasey’s lawyer, who asserted in a letter that Gary held the property on a resulting trust for Millie’s estate. Initially, Gary’s own lawyer expressed concerns about the 2016 transfer, noting it was done without Gary’s knowledge and that more information was needed. However, Gary later retained a different lawyer who proceeded to register a survivorship application, officially placing the property title into Gary’s name alone.
This chain of events led Gary to file a formal application with the court, seeking an order for possession of the house and a declaration that his brother and his children were trespassing. The respondents, Arnold, Kasey, and Kirby, filed a cross application, asking the court to grant possession of the house to Arnold in accordance with Millie’s last will and testament. They argued that Millie’s primary concern was ensuring Arnold, who had served as her caretaker for years after his father’s death and was financially dependent on her, would always have a place to live. Kasey submitted that the attempted transfer to her in 2022 was part of this plan, as she would allow her father to live there rent free while she cared for him. Their position was bolstered by a December 2022 email from the lawyer who drafted the will, Andrea Bain, who stated her belief that Gary had been added to the property title only for estate planning purposes to avoid probate taxes, and that the house should therefore be distributed according to Millie’s will.
In his decision, Justice Wilcox acknowledged the unfortunate nature of the family conflict, which was argued by the parties themselves without legal representation. The judge focused on the legal doctrine of resulting trust. He explained that when a parent transfers property to an adult child for no payment, the law presumes the child is holding the property in trust for the parent, not receiving it as an outright gift. The burden falls on the child to prove that a gift was intended.
Justice Wilcox found that Gary Lajeunesse failed to meet this burden. He concluded that the presumption of a resulting trust arose with the initial 2010 transfer. The evidence showed that Millie never truly relinquished control or beneficial ownership of her home. She and Arnold continued to live there, and other family members later moved in. The judge stated it was clear the property was not gifted to Gary for his own use. Millie’s subsequent actions, particularly the 2016 transfer that put her back on title as a joint tenant, were seen as powerful evidence that she continued to view the property as her own to manage. Justice Wilcox found Gary’s claim that the 2016 transfer was a fraud committed against him to be “incredible,” pointing to the lawyer’s reporting letter from that time as evidence of a standard transaction.
The judge further noted that Millie’s attempt to transfer the property to her granddaughter Kasey in the final weeks of her life was another clear demonstration of her intent to control the property’s fate. The consistent theme, the court found, was Millie’s unwavering intention to use the property for the benefit of her son Arnold. While her specific plan on how to achieve this goal evolved over the years, her underlying wish to provide for him did not. Gary, the judge concluded, appeared to be trying to enforce her initial plan, while Millie herself had moved on to different arrangements.
Ultimately, the court declared that Gary had not rebutted the presumption of a resulting trust. The Spring Street property was beneficially owned by Millie at the time of her death and is therefore part of her estate. Because her will leaves the estate to Arnold, the house will pass to him. The court ordered that the title to the property be transferred into Millie Lajeunesse’s name, to be formally administered as part of her estate. No costs were awarded to either party.
Read about more real estate cases here.
