Robert Pierce Budgell

Two consolidated applications concerning the estate of the deceased, Itaf Karim.

The widower sought to invalidate a holograph will and annul the certificate of administration issued to the daughter.

The daughter sought access to the safety deposit box and other relief.

The court found that an undated draft will, for which a certificate of administration had been issued, was not the true will of the deceased.

The court determined that a dated Arabic will deposited in the safety deposit box on May 27, 2024, reflected the deceased's true testamentary intentions.

The court revoked the certificate of administration, declared the May 27, 2024 will as the valid will, and ordered distribution of the estate according to its terms, with the residue passing to the widower.

Two consolidated applications concerning the estate of the deceased, Itaf Karim.

The widower sought to invalidate a holograph will and annul the certificate of administration issued to the daughter.

The daughter sought access to the safety deposit box and other relief.

The court found that an undated draft will, for which a certificate of administration had been issued, was not the true will of the deceased.

The court determined that a dated Arabic will deposited in the safety deposit box on May 27, 2024, reflected the deceased's true testamentary intentions.

The court revoked the certificate of administration, declared the May 27, 2024 will as the valid will, and ordered distribution of the estate according to its terms, with the residue passing to the widower.

The plaintiff, Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), brought a motion for summary judgment against American Haulage Inc. (American) for amounts owing under a credit agreement, and against its directors, Harsimran Singh Gill and Lakhwinder Dhindsa, based on personal guarantees.

The defendants sought an adjournment, which was denied due to lack of diligence in cross-examination and prior agreement on the hearing date.

The court found no genuine issue requiring a trial, concluding that American was in default of its credit obligations and that Gill and Dhindsa were liable under the new guarantee, despite their claims of not reading or understanding the documents or lacking independent legal advice.

Judgment was granted in favour of RBC against all defendants.

The defendant brought a motion under s.105 of the Courts of Justice Act for an order requiring the plaintiff to submit to a medical examination.

The plaintiff opposed the motion, citing significant delay by the defendant in seeking the examination, which would prejudice the plaintiff and delay the trial.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the defendant's delay was inexcusable and that the prejudice to the plaintiff, who was 77 years old, and to the orderly administration of justice outweighed the defendant's right to a medical examination, especially given the availability of other medical evidence and the potential inadmissibility of a late expert report under Rule 53.03.

The appellant appealed the trial judge's dismissal of her action seeking to invalidate two wills of her great-aunt on grounds of lack of testamentary capacity, lack of knowledge and approval of contents, and undue influence.

The appellant contended that the trial judge misapprehended the medical evidence regarding testamentary capacity and failed to distinguish between capacity to manage property and testamentary capacity.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's findings, holding that the appellant failed to establish special circumstances to rebut the presumption of testamentary capacity and that the trial judge's conclusion was fully supported by the evidence.

The plaintiff, Lorilee Ali, challenged the validity of Florence Louisa Blackburn's 2003 and 2000 Wills, alleging lack of testamentary capacity, lack of knowledge and approval, and undue influence.

The court found no suspicious circumstances regarding the preparation of the 2003 Will or undue influence.

While concerns about Florence's capacity were raised, the court determined that her belief that money was stolen by the plaintiff was a rational conclusion given the circumstances and her memory loss, not a delusion affecting testamentary capacity.

The court was satisfied that Florence possessed the requisite capacity and knowledge and approval for the 2003 Will.