He signed his land away to dodge creditors. Now the court won't help him get it back.
A Prince Edward Island farmer who transferred his land to hide it from creditors cannot ask a court to hand it back, a judge ruled.
The decision released July 13, 2026, ends a summary judgment fight that had run since the statement of claim was filed in January 2018.
Facing pressure in 2010 from two major creditors, Farm Credit Corporation and Finance PEI, the farmer arranged to move about 15 parcels of land and equipment out of his name while still running the operation himself.
The assets later landed in a company, B&R Farms Ltd., whose sole director and shareholder was the defendant. The farmer's case was that the defendant held legal title on paper only, that the two would split profits evenly, and that the land would be returned on request, so the company held it on a resulting trust for him.
The defendant denied any such deal. He said he paid substantial value for the property and dealt with the farmer's brother-in-law, not the farmer. Both sides sought summary judgment.
Justice John K. Mitchell of the Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island refused both. He found the defendant was not a bona fide purchaser for value, pointing to the absence of cheques or records showing payment, and dismissed the defendant's motion.
He also refused to help the farmer. Granting a resulting-trust declaration, he wrote, would force the court to rely on the farmer's own scheme to conceal assets from creditors - the sort of arrangement the clean hands doctrine bars.
The judge found the farmer had been insolvent in 2010, carrying a $465,000 judgment, and had shifted the property to keep it beyond his creditors' reach. When the farmer filed for bankruptcy in 2016 with total debts of $890,822, he did not disclose his interest in the land. Had the assets stayed in his name, the judge noted, creditors could have been paid in full.
The farmer's wife, who is a lawyer, swore affidavits valuing two of the transfers at $360,000 and $165,000, then filed amended affidavits in 2017 that put the consideration at nil. A law firm that once acted for the farmer was named as a third party.
Neither side won summary judgment. Even so, the judge awarded the farmer costs of $258,750, payable by the defendant and his company, citing the defendant's "reprehensible and dishonest conduct."
For advisors and estate planners, the ruling is a caution on creditor-proofing. Arrangements built to put assets beyond creditors can leave the person who set them up with no way to force those assets back.
