[162] I have already reviewed the inducement e-mail sent by Mr. Danilov to the Nikityuks in January 2008. I am satisfied that this was an offer which encouraged the Nikityuks to get their documents in order in furtherance of the Sponsorship Agreement, allowing them to immigrate to Canada. By their actions, the Nikityuks accepted the offer. They then sold their apartment, their car and their cottage. They transferred all of the proceeds to Svetlana. The transfer documents originating from the Russian bank used the word “present”. There is no evidence that this wording was discussed with the Nikityuks. It originated in the Russian banking documents. The Nikityuks had no input into that document.
What does it mean, exactly? Russia is very special, off course, but even Russian banks do not transfer money without clients’ input. Just imagine a bank transferring money back and forth, including abroad, “without client’s input” and think what Justice Mulligan is implying here. Really, your Honor???
On the contrary, “transfer documents originating from the Russian bank” have multiple Alla’s signatures and clearly state in Alla’s native language that the funds are transferred “not for investment purpose and not for buying real estate”, i.e. definitely not for “10% risk free investment” as in the “offer” they “accepted” (translated documents are here). How is this “no input”? Is it believable that during 3 years of the immigration process all “details were not discussed“? Mr. Danilov was financing Nikityuks’ immigration process and definitely would discuss those details, wouldn’t he? Nikityuks simply would not be permitted to immigrate by the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration if details were not discussed and all documents “in furtherance of the Sponsorship Agreement” were not in order already in 2004, 2005 the latest. Making life changing decisions and “putting documents in order” in 2008, when the long-waited permission to immigrate was finally obtained, was too late.
The reason why Alla put “PRESENT” in the bank draft was very simple: because it was a present. That is what Alla promised Pavel back in 2004 when he was about to make a decision to co-sign the sponsorship agreement or not. He was provider in the family and it was up to him, does he want Nikityuks in Canada or not. Alla’s input was discussed at the trial, but Justice Mulligan simply ignores that discussion and says “ah, there is no evidence!”, knowing that nobody ever would actually go through all that pile again and what he writes now becomes the truth forever because he is the judge and you are garbage.
So there is actually the evidence of GIFT, NOT TRUST. And this evidence, by the way, was concealed by Nikityuks till February 2016, just a few weeks before the Trial, despite of multiple motions in 2013-2016 with requests to produce those documents which were in possession of Nikityuks since 2008. Only by mistake of Nikityuks’ lawyer Mr. Bornmann’s assistant, in Mr. Bornmann’s absence, Danilovs were actually able to obtain those documents. It means that Nikityuks knew very well the importance of the evidence, but Justice Mulligan just plays on their side and pretends that “evidence does not exist” because he said so.