Raymond Henri Gouin

This decision concerns the costs arising from a dispute between the estate of Laurette Larivière and her son, Conrad Larivière.

The original applications involved claims by the estate regarding funds, accounting, and a life insurance policy, and counter-claims by Conrad for compensation for care and reimbursement of funeral expenses.

The court found that Conrad had substantial success in the underlying applications, particularly in retaining life insurance proceeds and securing reimbursement for funeral expenses, while the estate's claims for accounting and compensation against Conrad were largely rejected.

Consequently, the court awarded Conrad partial indemnity costs.

The applicants sought an order invalidating a will, removing an executor, appointing a new trustee, and for an accounting of the estate.

The respondents raised a preliminary issue regarding mandatory mediation in estate litigation.

The court dismissed the applicants' motion, holding that mandatory mediation under Rule 75.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure is required before a substantive hearing on the merits of the estate dispute can proceed.

The court emphasized the utility of mediation in identifying and resolving issues.

This decision addresses costs following an application where the applicant was granted a prescriptive easement, though in narrower terms than initially sought.

The applicant requested substantial indemnity costs of over $72,000, while the respondents sought partial indemnity costs of over $21,000, each claiming to be the successful party.

The court found the applicant's costs claim "breath-taking" and disproportionate to the modest value of the property and the limited scope of the argument.

Considering that the applicant sought an unlimited right-of-way but received an order reflecting only occasional use, and the respondents had not offered to formalize this occasional use, the court determined that neither party was entirely successful in their costs positions.

The applicant sought a prescriptive easement over the respondents' property to access her landlocked property.

The court found that the applicant established the necessary elements for a prescriptive easement, specifically for pedestrian use, limited to a maximum of twice per year, for a 20-year period commencing in 1979.

The respondents were ordered to provide the applicant with a key or other means to open the gate to enjoy her access.

La requérante a déposé une requête pour destituer l'intimé de son rôle de fiduciaire successoral, alléguant un conflit d'intérêts dû à des modifications importantes au testament du défunt père des parties, qui excluaient la requérante de la distribution des biens principaux.

La requérante a également remis en question la capacité testamentaire du père.

Le tribunal a rejeté la requête, concluant qu'il n'y avait pas de preuve concrète de l'incapacité du testateur ou d'une conduite négligente ou malicieuse de l'intimé, et que le simple conflit familial ne justifiait pas la destitution du fiduciaire.