Nunes v. Nunes The Need for Clear Loan Agreements
The Ontario Court of Appeal recently weighed in on a family dispute over a $230,000 transfer in Nunes v. Nunes, 2026 ONCA 54, showing how costly misunderstandings about “gifts” and “loans” can become.
Michael Nunes sent $230,000 to his relatives, Karen Ann Nunes and Dhruv Sharma, to help them close a real estate purchase. What started as a family favour turned into a legal battle when the pair refused to repay him, claiming the money was a gift. They also argued that if repayment was required, it was Michael’s son Neil, not them, who should be responsible.
A Superior Court judge didn’t see it that way. After reviewing the evidence, Justice Janet Mills ruled that there was nothing to support the “gift” claim or any agreement that Neil would pay the money back. She granted summary judgment, ordering repayment to Michael Nunes.
On January 27, 2026, the Court of Appeal agreed and found no reason to disturb the lower Court’s ruling. The appellants failed to show any factual errors or new evidence that could justify reopening the case. Their appeal was dismissed, and they were ordered to pay $10,000 in costs.
This case is a reminder that large personal financial transfers should always be documented, particularly within families.
Clear, written agreements can prevent emotional and financial strain later, especially when real estate and six-figure sums are involved.
Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker