On January 24, 2019, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court overturned the decision of the Application Judge in Re Milne Estate.
Kevin Valentyne was driving his car in downtown Vancouver on January 7, 2013. His girlfriend was with him. After receiving a telephone call, he drove to a house, entered it, with his car engine running. He told his girlfriend he would be right back. He never returned.
On November 23, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Moore v. Sweet, 2018 SCC 52, in which the majority imposed a remedial constructive trust on the proceeds of a life insurance policy in favour of the life insured’s former spouse. The life insured, and owner of the policy, Lawrence Anthony Moore, had orally agreed with his former spouse, Michelle Constance Moore, that he would retain her as the beneficiary of his life insurance policy, if she paid the insurance premiums. She did so, paying approximately $7,000 in premiums after her separation from Mr. Moore. He broke his promise to her, by appointing his new common-law spouse, Risa Lorraine Sweet, as the irrevocable beneficiary. The policy paid out $250,000. At death, Mr. Moore’s estate was insolvent.
I wrote about the Ontario decision in Re Milne Estate, in which Mr. Justice Dunphy refused to grant probate in respect of two wills on the grounds that in his view they were void for uncertainty of subject matter. A husband and wife each made two wills, one intended to deal with those assets for which an estate grant was required, and the other for which no grant would be required for the estate trustee to deal with the assets.
I described this two-will strategy to reduce probate as follows:
Pets are often a polarizing issue: are owners permitted pets, if so, what kind of pets are they allowed. Even if owners are permitted to have pets in their strata lot, the strata can force the removal of the pet under certain circumstances. Read More
Marijuana was an issue in strata’s before the legalization of marijuana, but was not as wide ranging an issue due to the fact that only medical marijuana was legal. Now, any persons can consume and grow their own marijuana. Read More
I suspect that a recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice is causing some consternation among the Ontario estate planning bar. In Re Milne Estate, 2018 ONSC 4174, the Court held that a will was void for uncertainty of subject matter and could not be admitted to probate. The effect of the decision was to frustrate a two-will estate planning strategy to minimize probate fees. In understand that the decision is under the appeal, and I would argue that the reasoning is fundamentally flawed. But it does highlight the risks of using a multiple-will strategy to reduce probate fees. Read More
Her Majesty the Queen v. Cheema, 2018 FCA 45 (CanLII)
Often home buyers need to rely on a guarantor in order to allow them to qualify for the mortgage. In such cases, a lender often requires the guarantor to be registered as an owner of the property; even if the parties agree that the purchasers are the sole beneficial owners of the property. In this context, the guarantor, or bare trustee, holds no beneficial interest in the property although they are a registered owner of the property. Read More
Strata Corporations can issue fines when an owner breaches the bylaws. At $200 an occurrence and a further $200/week for an ongoing contravention, the fines can add up fairly quickly. In the case of the Owners, Strata Plan KAS 3162 v Staerkle, 2018 BCSC 1290, the fines were in excess of $50,000.00, and the Court ordered the owner to pay the fines. Read More
Unreasonable noise can, depending on the circumstances, amount to nuisance. In law, a party that causes a nuisance, can be liable for somewhat nominal (depending on the circumstances) damages.
The case of Chen v The Owners, Strata Plan NW 2265, 2017 BCCRT 113, was a dispute as to whether the common property hot tub, Read More
Prem Lata Sharma is suing her sisters Raj Rani Sharma and Simmi Sharma. She is seeking to vary their mother Rama Rani Sharma’s will, pursuant to which she was disinherited, and she is also asking the court to declare that they hold title to their mother’s house in trust for the estate. Raj Rani Sharma is both a beneficiary and also the executor of the will. Their mother had gratuitously transferred the house into a joint tenancy with them, and their position is that they received the house by right-of-survivorship. Read More
In Sato v. Sato, 2018 BCCA 287, the British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld Mr. Justice Funt’s decision that Hiroyuki Rex Sato was domiciled in British Columbia when he married Makiko Sato on April 30, 2013, although he was living and working in Luxemburg at the time and had not lived in British Columbia since 1999. Read More
In Rosas v. Toca, 2018 BCCA 191, the British Columbia Court of Appeal held that a borrower’s promises to repay a loan modified the original loan agreement, and thereby extended the time during which the lender could file a lawsuit to collect the loan. The reasons in this decision have far-reaching implications for the law of contract in British Columbia. The Court of Appeal has held that it is no longer necessary for a party to provide fresh consideration to modify a contract. Read More
The Supreme Court Civil Rules provide that a proceeding to prove the validity of a will must be started by either a notice of application, if there is an existing proceeding in which it is appropriate to do so, or by a petition. This is set out in Rule 25-14(4). This is a significant change to the practice. Prior to the changes to the Rules with the coming into force of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, contested proceedings to prove a will were brought by a notice of civil claim. A proceeding begun by Notice of Civil Claim is referred to as an “Action.” The difference is that an Action has pretrial procedures such as disclosure of documents, and oral examinations for discovery, and ultimately a trial with witnesses testifying in court. In contrast, a notice of application or petition does not have the pretrial disclosure process and the evidence is by way of affidavits. Read More
Not only can the CRT make default orders against a respondent that fails to file a response to a claim, but the CRT can make default orders against a party that files a response and fails to respond to communications from the CRT.
As previously discussed in a past post, there is an ability to overturn default orders. However, once a default order is granted, overturning it will be more difficult than simply responding to the process in the first place. Further, there is always the risk being denied the request to overturn the default decision. Read More
I and Mark Brade have the honour of presenting our Wills and Estates Intro – Why You Need an Estate Plan at the 14th Annual Senior’s Safety Fair: Read More
Section 151 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act permits a beneficiary of a will, or in the case of an intestacy, an intestate successor to apply to court to bring or defend a claim in the name of the personal representative. Read More
The short answer is yes: in certain circumstances council can require access to your strata lot and you can be penalized if you don’t grant that access. Read More
A topic that comes up often is whether the strata corporation has adequately repaired its common property. This came up in the case of Rueger v The Owners, Strata Plan VR 319, 2017 BCCRT 80.
The strata corporation had heating cables in its roadway, that were installed when the strata corporation was built 40 years ago. In the 40 years since, the heating cables started to fail and needed to be replaced completely if they were to work again. Read More
In two recent decisions regarding the same parties, a strata corporation has taken steps to enforce its age restriction bylaws against an owner who was below the age limit and continued to reside in the strata lot.
In the case of The Owners, Strata Plan NWS 3075 v. Stevens, 2017 BCSC 1306 (not available), the strata corporation asked the court to confirm that the owner was breaching its age bylaw, and then sued the owner again in The Owners, Strata Plan NW 3075 v. Stevens, 2018 BCPC 2 to collect the fines. Read More
Estate planning for people with assets and connections to both the United States and British Columbia is fraught with potential legal and tax pitfalls. It is important to get tax and legal advice with respect to the implications on both sides of the border. This is illustrated by the recent decision concerning the former NHL coach Pat Quinn in Quinn Estate, 2018 BCSC 365. Read More
I have the honour of speaking at the Continuing Legal Education Course on Estate Litigation Basics, at the Pan Pacific in Vancouver on April 13, 2018. I am speaking about evidence in estate litigation. My paper is co-authored (or will be when it’s done) by Taeya Fitzpatrick of my firm.
The course is chaired by Lauren Blake of Legacy Tax and Trust Lawyers, Vancouver. The other faculty are:
Read More
The Strata Property Regulation was amended, effective as of March 7, 2018, to permit strata corporation’s to charge user fees for common property use.
The chargeback must be reasonable, depending on: Read More
If you would like further information or would like to meet with one of our lawyers please feel free to contact us.
