Andrew Sheremeta

The applicant husband brought an application seeking directions on the interpretation of his deceased wife's will, the removal of the estate's executors, and an immediate distribution of $652,705.35.

He argued that the will's treatment of his life interest in one-quarter of the residue created a partial intestacy upon his death.

The court rejected this interpretation, applying the golden rule of construction to find that the testatrix intended the remainder of his share to be divided among the other three shares.

The court also dismissed the claims for immediate distribution and removal of the executors, finding no maladministration and noting that the estate's delayed income was due to a separate foreign estate not controlled by the executors.

The mother brought a motion to enforce child support and section 7 expenses under a separation agreement.

The father brought a cross-motion to change the agreement to terminate or reduce his support obligations.

The court held that because the separation agreement had not been filed under section 35 of the Family Law Act, it lacked jurisdiction to vary the agreement under Rule 15, but retained jurisdiction to enforce it under Rule 14.

The court enforced the agreement, ordering the father to pay child support and section 7 expenses for the son attending college, but found the obligation for the daughter ceased when she completed her degree.