Frank J. Tkach

The moving party challenged the validity of the testator's 2007 Will, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, lack of knowledge and approval, suspicious circumstances, and undue influence.

The testator, who had a lifelong history of bipolar disorder, changed her Will to name her niece as the sole beneficiary, removing the moving party.

The court found that the Will was duly executed and that the propounder of the Will satisfied the burden of proving capacity.

The court preferred the evidence of the respondent's medical expert and concluded the change in beneficiary was not the result of any delusion or disease of the mind.

The 2007 Will was declared valid.

The applicant sought to have a RRIF included as an estate asset despite designated beneficiaries, relying on a deed of arrangement signed by the heirs.

The court found the RRIF was not an estate asset and the deed of arrangement did not alter this, as all parties were mistaken about the estate's net value.

The court ordered the executor to repay $21,592.72 he had personally spent from the estate.

Due to this misappropriation, the court removed him as estate trustee and appointed the applicant in his place.

A law firm was also ordered to repay an inadvertent overpayment of $579.34.

The appellant appealed a trial judge's decision which found that the respondent did not convey an RRSP with fraudulent intent under section 2 of the Fraudulent Conveyances Act.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge made no error in apprehending the evidence or arriving at her conclusion based on findings of fact.

Costs of $6,000 were awarded to the respondent.