Bernadette Dietrich

The applicant, as trustee of her late husband's estate, sought enforcement of a settlement agreement reached in 2020 with the respondents regarding the purchase of her interest in family business assets and real property.

The respondents had paid the settlement amount but refused to execute the Minutes of Settlement and Release and Indemnity, claiming the release provisions would compromise their separate action against their former counsel.

The court found a binding settlement existed and that enforcement was appropriate, granting judgment in accordance with the settlement terms and ordering execution of the documents within seven days.

The court awarded costs on a substantial indemnity basis.

The court granted the applicant trustee’s request to pass accounts, dispense with a formal passing for a subsequent period, approve compensation, remove herself as trustee, and appoint CIBC Trust as successor.

The court found the trustee’s compensation reasonable, the objections of the respondent Michael Wilson unsubstantiated, and awarded increased costs against Michael due to his conduct.

The decision addresses the administration of a testamentary trust, the entitlement to compensation, and the allocation of costs in estate litigation.

The decision addresses claims for dependant’s support under Part V of the Succession Law Reform Act by Elena Nikitina (alleged common-law spouse) and Rosa Maria Huynh (adult child) against the estate of Cong Hoanh Huynh.

The court found that Ms. Nikitina was not a common-law spouse and thus not entitled to support, but that Rosa was a dependant and entitled to a lump-sum support payment.

The judgment provides a detailed analysis of the legal and factual requirements for establishing cohabitation and dependency, and the quantum and duration of support for adult children.

The applicant, Rosemary Maki, sought leave under section 42 of the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, to compel the respondent, Lucien Cammaert, to pass his accounts regarding his management of their father's (Willy Cammaert) property.

The father, 89 and in long-term care, was deemed to lack capacity.

The applicant alleged extensive involvement and mismanagement by the respondent since 2016, leading to a significant erosion of the father's assets.

The respondent claimed the father managed his own finances until a stroke in February 2024 and that transfers were gifts.

The court granted leave, finding the applicant had a genuine interest and that the respondent was involved in the property's management since January 2016, regardless of the father's capacity at the time, and had not fully accounted for his dealings.

The applicant was awarded costs.

The applicant sought the court's advice and direction on whether an enforceable agreement was formed for her to purchase a property from the deceased's estate, as per an option granted in the will.

The will stipulated a 60-day period to enter into an enforceable agreement.

The respondent estate trustee argued that no enforceable agreement was made within this period because a formal written offer was received after 70 days.

The court found that the exchange of email correspondence between the applicant and the respondent within the 60-day period constituted an enforceable agreement, as the will did not require a formal written document.

The court dismissed the respondent's arguments regarding lack of certainty of terms and the assertion that it was merely an agreement to agree, concluding that a meeting of the minds on all essential terms had occurred.

The Estate Trustee of Nazzareno Coccia's estate sought the court's advice and direction regarding the interpretation of the deceased's Ontario Will and its effect on a prior Italian Will, particularly concerning real property in Italy.

The court determined that the Ontario Will, containing a revocation clause, effectively revoked the Italian Will.

Furthermore, the court found that the Ontario Will created a partial intestacy regarding the Italian real property, as the term "money" in the will could not be broadly construed to include land.

Consequently, the Italian real property passed to the deceased's nieces (next of kin) under Italian intestate succession law, as directed by conflict of law principles (lex situs).

The applicant, claiming to be a common-law spouse, sought to prove the deceased's will in solemn form and obtain dependant's support.

The respondent, the Estate Trustee and sole beneficiary, brought a motion for vacant possession of the condominium where the applicant resided and to strike the applicant's will challenge for lack of standing.

The court granted the applicant interim possession of the condominium on terms (requiring him to pay all maintenance, insurance, and property taxes) until his dependant's support application is resolved.

However, the court dismissed the applicant's challenge to the will, finding he lacked the necessary financial interest or standing, as his potential dependant's support claim would not be affected by the will's validity.

This motion addresses the interim management of an incapable person's (Lionel Bascus) property and personal care, pending a full application challenging the validity of recently executed powers of attorney (POAs) and a property transfer.

The applicant, Mr. Bascus's daughter, sought directions for his care and production of records, alleging the respondent, Mr. Bascus's sister, was not acting in his best interests.

The court found the respondent was not adhering to statutory principles for substitute decision-makers, particularly regarding consultation and advocating for appropriate long-term care.

The court ordered directions for personal care, mandating consultation between the parties and access to medical information for the applicant.

It also ordered limited production of medical and solicitor records relevant to the POAs and property transfers, but denied access to financial and estate planning records.

The respondent's request to unfreeze bank accounts was denied as it was not brought by motion.

The applicant, Giuseppe Campo, as Estate Trustee and in his personal capacity, brought an application alleging that the respondent, Melinda Longo, breached her fiduciary duties as Maria Campo's attorney for property and unjustly enriched herself.

The applicant sought orders compelling the respondent to pass her accounts, declaring certain joint bank accounts and a TFSA as estate assets, and invalidating the TFSA beneficiary designation due to Maria's incapacity and the respondent's undue influence.

The respondent conceded the joint accounts were estate assets but disputed the TFSA and the requirement to pass accounts.

The court granted all orders sought by the applicant, finding suspicious circumstances regarding the TFSA designation and compelling the respondent to account for her actions as attorney for property.

The applicant, Kristy Rae Wheeler, sought costs following her successful motion to remove Allen Wilford and A. Wilford Professional Corporation as counsel for James Bruce MacAulay due to a conflict of interest, and to appoint s. 3 counsel for Mr. MacAulay.

The court found that Mr. Wilford's decision to defend the motion, despite a clear conflict, caused unnecessary costs.

The court awarded Ms. Wheeler partial indemnity costs, with a portion payable personally by Mr. Wilford and the remainder by Mr. MacAulay, as the motion also benefited Mr. MacAulay.

This application concerned the validity of powers of attorney (POAs) made by an 82-year-old respondent, Larry Alvin Marshall, and whether a guardian of his property and person should be appointed.

The applicants, Shawn Hollinger (Attorney for Personal Care) and MD Private Trust Company (Attorney for Property), sought to invalidate new POAs made in January 2023 that named Mr. Marshall's estranged sons, Thomas and Bryan Marshall, as attorneys.

The court found that Mr. Marshall lacked the requisite capacity to make the 2023 POAs due to significant cognitive impairment and vulnerability to undue influence.

Suspicious circumstances surrounding the preparation and execution of the 2023 POAs shifted the burden of proof to the grantees, which was not met.

Consequently, the 2023 POAs were declared invalid, and the 2022 POAs were affirmed as Mr. Marshall's last valid powers of attorney.

The applicant, as estate trustee, sought the court's advice and direction on three issues: the beneficial ownership and exigibility of a residential property (Concession Road Property), the legal validity of an insurance policy trust for the deceased's children, and leave to assign the estate into bankruptcy.

The court found that the Concession Road Property was beneficially owned by the deceased's ex-wife and was not exigible for estate creditors.

It also determined that the purported insurance policy trust was not legally binding due to precatory language and lack of certainty of subject matter.

Finally, the court denied leave for the estate to be assigned into bankruptcy, finding the applicant had not sufficiently proven the estate's insolvency.

This motion concerned the removal of RSM Canada Limited as the Estate Trustee During Litigation (ETDL) of the Estate of Peter Trezzi and as the court-appointed Manager of two corporations.

The moving party, Albert Trezzi, also sought the appointment of himself and his two sisters as Estate Trustees.

RSM did not oppose its discharge but sought a holdback for professional fees related to a pending passing of accounts.

The court granted the removal of RSM and the appointment of the new Estate Trustees, and ordered a holdback of $250,000 for RSM's fees, finding it equitable and consistent with public policy, despite the beneficiaries' objections to the quantum.

The moving party, Pamela Pal, sought an order for partition or sale of a residential property jointly owned with her daughter, Faythe R. Pal (the responding party), under the Partition Act.

Pamela owns an 80% interest, and Faythe, who resides in the property and operates a business from it, owns 20%.

Pamela sought to sell the property to access her equity and purchase a condominium for independent living.

Faythe opposed the sale, citing financial hardship and alleging bad faith on Pamela's part.

The court granted the partition or sale, finding Pamela had a prima facie right to the sale and was not acting in bad faith.

The court determined that Faythe's personal hardship and inconvenience were not sufficient reasons to deny the order.

The decision also addressed the sale of other jointly held assets (an Aruba timeshare and Milton Lands) and the conditional issuance of a writ of possession.

The Applicants, beneficiaries of an estate, challenged the compensation claimed by the Estate Trustees (Respondents) and the legal fees paid to the Respondents' law firm.

The court found that the Respondents could not rely on a compensation agreement incorporated into the will because it was not properly executed by the alternative trustee.

The court also found that the Respondents breached their fiduciary duty by requiring the Applicants to sign releases without proper explanation or advice, and by holding distributions hostage.

Applying the "five factors" for compensation, the court significantly reduced the executors' compensation from $300,000 to $194,933.84 plus HST, and disallowed a substantial portion of the legal fees claimed by the Respondents' firm, finding double-counting and unjustified charges.

Anil Persaud, as Litigation Administrator for the Estate of Rita Persaud, brought a motion seeking to dismiss applications by Girga Persaud and Mohini Persaud, declare Chabiraj Persaud in contempt of court, and for costs and transfer of funds.

The court dismissed both Girga's and Mohini's applications due to delay and vexatious conduct, respectively.

It declined to find Chabiraj in contempt for breach of a monetary order but found his conduct reprehensible.

Substantial indemnity costs were awarded against Chabiraj and Mohini equally for the motions and applications.

The request to transfer all proceeds to the Litigation Administrator's counsel was denied, with only reimbursement for storage fees approved, pending collection of damages from Chabiraj and proper estate administration.

The applicant sought court advice and direction regarding the mental capacity of his wife, the respondent, Anna Naccarato, to manage her property and personal care.

The application also sought the release of a Continuing Power of Attorney for Property (CPOAP) and a Power of Attorney for Personal Care (POAPC) to the applicant, and his appointment as a partial, time-limited guardian of the respondent's person.

The court found the respondent incapable of managing her property and personal care (specifically health care, shelter, and safety) based on anecdotal evidence from family members and section 3 counsel, without requiring a formal capacity assessment.

The court ordered the release of the CPOAP to the applicant and appointed him as partial, time-limited guardian of the respondent's person with custodial and apprehension powers, but declined to order the release of the POAPC due to lack of evidence regarding its release conditions.

The Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company, as Estate Trustee, sought court advice on interpreting a 1957 will establishing a charitable remainder trust.

The will's language was unclear regarding income beneficiaries among the Testator's grandchildren and the trust's administration.

The court determined that only Betty Burnett and Kathryn Baker were entitled to income, not Rosalie Anita Grimes or Robert Alan Jackson, due to specific conditions in the will regarding the number of children of the Testator's son.

The court also confirmed the trust's perpetual charitable nature, ruling against any wind-up or variation for the benefit of descendants without the Public Guardian and Trustee's consent, which was not given.

The applicant, Kathleen Florence Doherty, as Estate Trustee, sought an accounting and recovery of funds from Terrence Doherty, who, as attorney for property for the late Molly Marie Doherty, had withdrawn and transferred over $329,000 to himself, his spouse Sylvia, and their son Liam.

The court found that the transferred amounts were not valid inter vivos gifts and that Terrence breached his fiduciary duties.

Sylvia was found jointly and severally liable for knowingly assisting in the breach, while Liam was ordered to make restitution for the funds he received.

Full indemnity costs were awarded against the respondents due to the reprehensible conduct.

The applicant sought to invalidate powers of attorney (POAs) executed by Janina Jackiewicz in 2021, which appointed the respondent, Yolanta Zawadzinski, as attorney.

The applicant also sought to confirm the validity of earlier 2019 POAs, which appointed the applicant.

The court found suspicious circumstances surrounding the 2021 POAs, including Ms. Jackiewicz's diminished capacity and the respondent's undue influence, supported by a capacity assessment report.

The court declared the 2021 POAs invalid and the 2019 POAs valid and operative.

The respondent was ordered to provide an accounting of Ms. Jackiewicz's property managed since October 2021.