Reid v Castleton-Reid

In Reid v Castleton-Reid, the plaintiff, Ross Ronayne Reid, sought various equitable remedies against his son, Barry Ross Laurence Castleton-Reid, in relation to $1,700,000 deposited into a share trading account in his son’s name. Mr Reid claimed that the agreement was that his son would be the nominee owner of shares purchased with the money, while Mr Castleton-Reid maintained that his father had gifted him the money. The court had to determine whether there was an agreement for Mr Castleton-Reid to act as nominee for Mr Reid, or whether Mr Reid had gifted the money to his son.

The court found that Mr Reid had not established that there was an agreement for his son to act as a nominee, and that all the money deposited into the share trading account was intended to be a gift to Mr Castleton-Reid. The court based this finding on the evidence presented, including Mr Reid’s inconsistent statements, his tendency to make untrue statements, and the lack of evidence to support his claim that his son was merely acting as a nominee.

As a result, all three causes of action brought by Mr Reid – breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust, and restitution – failed. The court dismissed Mr Reid’s claims and entered judgment in favour of Mr Castleton-Reid. The court also awarded costs to Mr Castleton-Reid and encouraged the parties to agree on the costs.