This is a loaded question. The short answer is: it depends. If you’re interested in the long answer, keep reading.
Why is this question so complicated? We have the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Pecore v Pecore (2007 SCC 17 (CanLII)) and the caselaw that follows it to thank. In essence, when a parent puts an asset—such as a bank account—into joint names with an adult child without receiving any consideration in return, the law presumes that the asset was not intended as a gift. Instead, the adult child is presumed to be holding the asset in trust for the parent’s estate. This legal principle is known as the presumption of resulting trust.
Based on that rule, the technical answer to the question above would be: no, you do not automatically get the account balance when your parent dies. However, like most legal rules, there is an exception. The presumption of resulting trust can be rebutted. But how? If the issue ends up before the court, it would be your responsibility to rebut the presumption that there was not a gift and you are holding the account for your father, and that if deceased, his estate if you want to claim the remaining balance in the joint account.
Courts consider a number of factors when determining whether the presumption has been rebutted. Some of these were discussed in In the Estate of Christina Georgiou Psoma (2025 ONSC 1476 (CanLII)).
At the heart of the issue is one key question: what was your father’s intention? More specifically, what was his intention at the time the account was made joint? Was it intended as a gift to you, or was the arrangement simply meant to make it easier for you to help your father manage the account?
Ideally, there would be evidence of your father’s intention contemporaneous with the transfer. However, courts may also consider later evidence if it sheds light on what his intention was at the time of the transfer.
Some Factors the Court May Consider
- Additional bank documentation
Documents such as signature cards, account agreements, or financial services documentation may indicate whether your father intended the account to pass to you as the surviving joint holder.
- Account usage
How was the account used while your father was alive? Who controlled the account and who made withdrawals? This type of evidence can be helpful but is not decisive.
- Evidence of tax treatment
Another potentially relevant factor is how income from the account was reported for tax purposes, as this may reflect how you and your father understood ownership of the funds. However, tax treatment alone is rarely determinative.
- Power of Attorney
Did your father prepare a power of attorney, and who did he appoint as his attorney? If he appointed you, this may support an inference that he intended you to benefit from the joint account, since you could very well have assisted him with managing the account in your capacity as attorney without needing to be named as joint owner.
That said, an important consideration is whether your father understood the distinction between granting a power of attorney and gifting a right of survivorship in property.
- The Will
Does your father’s Will say that the joint account proceeds should pass to you by right of survivorship? This would be relevant when determining his intention, particularly if the Will contains other commentary explaining his overall estate plan.
- The relationship
Finally, is there a broader pattern of conduct in the relationship between you and your father that might shed light on his intentions?
Key Takeaway
The key question will always be the transferor’s intention at the time the transfer into joint names was made. For families looking to avoid disputes, the safest approach is to document intentions clearly when creating joint accounts, whether through written instructions, estate planning documents, or discussions with legal and financial advisors.
For Further Reading
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: the Consequences of RRSPs on your Estate, Beneficiaries, May 17, 2024
Think of Your Executor when Planning with Joint Assets, July 5, 2022
Owning a Home Jointly with a Child – More Trouble than it’s Worth? November 16, 2016
Beneficiary Designations – Problems and Pitfalls of Using Financial Institutions’ Standard Forms, December 10, 2014
— Namratha Sankar