Maija Pluto

The applicant, Nazha Boulos as estate trustee, sought a declaration that her late husband's estate was the beneficiary of three Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF) accounts held by Duca Financial Services Credit Union for the late Yura Nicola Khagek.

Mr. Khagek had previously designated Mr. Boulos as the beneficiary of his Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) accounts, which were later automatically converted to RRIFs by Duca Financial without a new beneficiary designation.

The court, applying principles from the Succession Law Reform Act and relevant case law, found that the original RRSP beneficiary designation traced to the converted RRIF accounts, reflecting Mr. Khagek's clear intention to gift the funds to Mr. Boulos.

The application was granted, declaring Mr. Boulos's estate as the beneficiary of the RRIF accounts.

On appeal, the court concluded the appellant should have been successful at trial and awarded damages of $438,113 in addition to other relief.

The appellant had made a pre-trial Rule 49 offer to settle for $180,000.

The court determined the appellant was entitled to partial indemnity costs up to the date of the offer and substantial indemnity costs thereafter.

However, because a significant portion of the trial involved testing claims the appellant made which the trial judge found to be untrue, and many of those findings were undisturbed on appeal, the costs award was adjusted to reflect that the trial was not an unqualified success for the appellant.

The plaintiff, a 72-year-old security guard, was terminated after 12 years of service.

The employer provided a letter stating employment would end in a few months but gave no firm date, and the plaintiff continued working for seven months before being abruptly fired without statutory entitlements.

The plaintiff mitigated his damages by finding new employment and brought a motion for summary judgment.

The court found the initial notice was insufficient as it lacked a firm date and the employment continued beyond the 13-week regulatory period.

The court awarded damages for breach of contract and additional damages for mental distress due to the employer's unfair conduct.