Court of Appeal for Ontario

Verscheure v. Antkiw

Date: 2000-01-21

Sheena J. MacAskill (McCarthy, Tétrault), for the plaintiffs/respondents;

Jeanie DeMarco (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt), for the defendant/appellant.

(C29284)

[1] By the Court: The trial judge's decision depended in large measure on the credibility of the witnesses. He had the distinct advantage of seeing the witnesses. He clearly preferred the evidence presented by the respondents over that of the appellant.

[2] There was clear evidence that raised a presumption of undue influence. The appellant failed to prove that the gifts had not been brought about by undue influence on his part.

[3] Contrary to the appellant's submission, the facts of this case did not give rise to the presumption that the 1988 will had been revoked. The trial judge's findings implicitly recognized the validity of the 1988 will and the evidence supports that conclusion.

[4] We see no error in the exercise of the trial judge's discretion on the issue of costs.

[5] The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondents payable by the appellant.

Appeal dismissed.