Court File and Parties
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF Keisha Lagrandeur (also known as Keisha Ann Andrews and Keisha Andrews), deceased
BETWEEN:
Gaetan Lagrandeur, Moving Party
AND:
Noah Lagrandeur and Yvon Cloutier, Responding Parties
BEFORE: The Honourable Madam Justice K.E. Cullin
COUNSEL: Réjean Parisé, for the Moving Party Jordan Duplessis, for the Responding Parties
HEARD: Motion heard February 26, 2021 Written Costs Submissions dated June 9, 2021 and June 10, 2021
ENDORSEMENT ON COSTS
Introduction
1This matter appeared before me for a motion for directions pursuant to Rule 75.06 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, with respect to the Estate of Keisha (Andrews) Lagrandeur. This decision addresses the issue of costs arising from that motion.
2The parties have made written submissions regarding the issue of costs. The moving party, Gaetan Lagrandeur (“Gaetan”), seeks his costs of the motion specifically against the respondent, Yvon Cloutier. The responding parties, Noah Lagrandeur and Yvon Cloutier (“Noah” and “Yvon”), seek their costs of the motion from Gaetan.
Analysis
3A motion for directions was necessary. This is not a straightforward estate; it requires the appointment of an estate trustee. There are potentially significant estate assets, there is an issue regarding the validity of the will, there are several parties who may have claims against the estate, and there may be trusts which will have to be established and administered.
4Gaetan was the only party who took the necessary step of applying to the court for directions. While Noah and Yvon objected to Gaetan’s request to be appointed as estate trustee, they took no formal steps to make their own application or to offer alternatives to Gaetan’s appointment to the court.
5The respondents suggest that they had little time to respond to Gaetan’s application. I do not accept this submission. Noah retained counsel well in advance of Gaetan’s application and was aware of the issues in dispute. There is no evidence before me that either Noah or Yvon took any further steps to place this matter before the court to seek directions after filing their notice of objection on July 28, 2020, notwithstanding the fact that such directions were clearly necessary.
6While Gaetan’s motives are still questionable, what I note from the correspondence included with his costs submissions is his overall objective of creating a trust for his sons from the net proceeds of the estate. His insistence on doing so to the exclusion of Yvon may be an effort to protect his sons or to punish the person whom he believes is responsible for ending his marriage. The suggestion that he may be negotiating his interest in the estate against his future child support obligations may be financially self-interested or a financial sacrifice intended to benefit his children. There is insufficient information before me to conclude that he is the bad actor in this production.
7Although it is my view that Gaetan is an inappropriate candidate to be appointed as estate trustee, and although I have concerns about his motives, I do not question his decision to take steps to advance the administration of the estate. Gaetan was the named estate trustee in Keisha’s only known testamentary document, and no other party had applied to be appointed more than a year after Keisha’s death. It was necessary to realize the estate’s assets and to formulate a plan for the administration of Noah and Evan’s interests in the estate. Gaetan’s application advanced the administration of the estate by providing the parties with preliminary directions when they were at an impasse.
Disposition
8It is my view that Gaetan’s application should not be his personal expense. There is no evidence before me that would justify an award of costs against Yvon Cloutier personally, and I decline to make such an order. I do, however, order that Gaetan’s costs are to be payable forthwith from the proceeds of the estate, with such costs to be fixed on a substantial indemnity basis in the amount of $5,061.91.
9With respect to the costs incurred by Yvon and Noah in disputing Gaetan’s application, it is my view that, while it was appropriate for them to challenge Gaetan’s request to be appointed as estate trustee, their failure to take proactive steps to put forth an appropriate alternate candidate undermined the opportunity for resolution or to further advance the administration of the estate at the hearing of the application. In the circumstances, I order that their costs are also to be payable forthwith from the proceeds of the estate, but that such costs are to be fixed on a partial indemnity basis in the amount of $4,953.78.
K.E. Cullin, J.
Date: July 29, 2021