Neil Milton

The applicant sought relief in an appeal before the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

The court reviewed the record and applied the governing legal and procedural standards, including deference to factual and discretionary determinations where required.

The matter concluded with the following disposition: Appeal dismissed.

This motion for directions concerned the estate of Paula Vout, deceased, with the Applicant seeking a determination of funds improperly diverted by the Respondent and whether certain transfers were gifts.

The Respondent, the deceased's daughter and named Estate Trustee, had failed to probate the will, account for assets, or comply with previous court orders.

The court found that joint assets remaining at death ($157,000) were owed to the Estate.

Further, $205,000 in "Real Estate Advances" claimed by the Respondent as gifts were determined to be subject to a resulting trust in favour of the Estate, as the Respondent failed to provide corroborating evidence to rebut the presumption of gift.

The court allowed a deduction of $70,000 for legitimate healthcare and property maintenance expenses incurred by the deceased.

The total amount found owing to the Estate was $453,000.

The court clarified that the Estate Trustee, not the Applicant, was responsible for collecting these funds.

Costs were reserved for further submissions.

The Applicants, beneficiaries of an estate, sought costs against the Respondent, the initially appointed estate trustee, after the court ordered the Respondent to be passed over due to unreasonable conduct and delay in estate administration.

The court awarded the Applicants costs of $29,276.15, payable personally by the Respondent, to be set off against any executor compensation.

The decision emphasized the modern approach to costs in estate litigation, focusing on fairness, proportionality, and reasonableness, and noting that estate trustees are not indemnified for costs incurred defending personal interests or due to unreasonable actions.

The applicants brought an application under section 140 of the Courts of Justice Act to have the respondent declared a vexatious litigant.

The respondent, a resident of the applicant co-operative, had initiated multiple overlapping and unsuccessful proceedings against the applicants over several years, accumulating unpaid costs orders.

The court found that the respondent's conduct was oppressive, intended for improper purposes, and consumed a disproportionate share of judicial resources.

The application was granted, and the respondent was prohibited from initiating or continuing proceedings without leave of the court.

The estate trustee applied to resolve two questions arising from the deceased's Will.

The deceased had named his estranged spouse as the beneficiary of a Life Income Fund Account but later directed in his Will that the funds be used to pay estate debts.

The court found that the spouses were living separate and apart at the time of death, meaning the spouse was not automatically entitled to the funds under pension legislation.

The court also held that the Will effectively revoked the earlier beneficiary designation.

Finally, the court ordered the spouse to pay $2,160 to the Estate for occupational rent and expenses incurred after the 60-day rent-free period provided by the Family Law Act.