How have the courts interpreted the constructive trust remedy in a family law case?

In Peter v. Beblow 44 R.F.L. (3d) at page 331, Cory J. states: In a family relationship the contribution need not be directly linked to a specific asset to justify imposing a constructive trust. The use of the constructive trust remedy does not have to be as limited in family law cases as it is in commercial cases. It should be imposed when a partner expects to receive a fair share of the assets that he or she helped to acquire, rather than a fee for services performed. … The parties entering a marriage … will rarely have considered the question of compensation for benefits. …they might say that because they loved their partner, each worked to achieve the common goal of creating a home and establishing a good life for themselves. …in the absence of evidence establishing a contrary intention, the parties expected to share in the assets created in a matrimonial … relationship, should it end. … …it is unlikely that couples will ever turn their minds to the issue of their expectations about their legal entitlements at the outset of their marriage…. If they were … asked about their expectations, …most couples would probably state that they did not expect to be compensated for their contribution. …they would say, if the relationship were ever to be dissolved, then they would expect that both parties would share in the assets or wealth that they had helped to create. …rather than expecting to receive a fee for their services based on their market value, they would expect to receive, on a dissolution of their relationship, a fair share of the property … which their contributions had helped the parties to acquire, improve, or to maintain. … …equity and fairness should guide the court in determining the value and contributions made by the parties. … It would not be just to allow both parties to benefit from each other’s services but allow only one to keep all the economic resources. …the court has moved away from family law that is property- and support-driven towards family law that encourages the sharing of resources. A fair system of family law would identify the family resources regardless of their value or income-producing capabilities, and ensure that they are shared. … Judges must, …do the best they can on the basis of the evidence but before them, taking judicial notice of those things which are common knowledge with respect to the realities of spousal relationships and the property and financial markets. It is with this broad view that we must approach the task of quantifying what I have called the “net appreciation in value”.