Angers J. found the taxpayer liable for the value of the family residence transferred from her husband, whose tax debt was approximately $900,000. The taxpayer contended that she paid valuable consideration pursuant to a "deed of partition," dated 20 April 1989, to change the distribution of their property between them under the "change of matrimonial regime" provisions under the Civil Code. However, the house was transferred under a separate deed of sale dated 30 June 1988, under which the taxpayer was to pay $1 and "other good and valuable consideration."
In rejecting the taxpayer's contention, Angers J. found that:
- the deed of sale was not part of any matrimonial regime, given inter alia that it contained a provision that specifically denied that there was a matrimonial regime;
- the consideration was not fixed at the time of transfer; and
- no consideration was in fact paid, and no change in matrimonial regime took place.