Does a resulting trust arise when title to property is in one party's name but that party gave no value for the property?

A resulting trust arises when title to property is in one party's name, but that party, because he or she is a fiduciary or gave no value for the property, is under an obligation to return it to the original title holder (see Pecore v. Pecore, 2007 SCC 17, at para. 20).

When a transfer is made gratuitously, equity presumes that the recipient holds the property on a resulting trust for the giver. If, however, there is clear evidence of the transferor's intention, the presumption need not be relied upon because the true intention is clear. In a situation of an express trust, as exists here, PW's intention is clear and unambiguous, and there is no room left for the doctrine of resulting trust to operate (see Elsen v. Elsen, 2011 BCCA 314 at paras. 20 to 33).