Wills, Estates, Trusts Law - SCJ

This endorsement addresses an application by Stephen Vriend to be appointed guardian of property and person for his mother, Ellen Charlotte Vriend, who suffers from severe dementia.

The court granted the guardianship of the person, approving the proposed Guardianship Plan.

However, the application for guardianship of property was adjourned due to significant potential conflicts of interest arising from Stephen's role as Estate Trustee for Ellen's deceased husband's estate, from which Ellen is a major beneficiary.

The court also addressed various procedural deficiencies, including improper service on Ellen's siblings and the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT), and non-compliance with court document formatting rules.

The PGT was ordered to arrange independent legal representation for Ellen to protect her interests regarding the property guardianship.

The plaintiff, a 98-year-old woman, sued her daughters and son-in-law for the recovery of money alleged to have been loaned, which the defendants claimed was a gift.

During the trial, the court raised concerns about the plaintiff's capacity to instruct counsel and maintain the action, despite her counsel's assurances.

The court issued an interim order, declining to make a final determination on the merits until the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT) has an opportunity to investigate the plaintiff's capacity and provide submissions on appropriate next steps.

The applicant sought partition and sale of a property that was the primary residence of her late mother, forming part of the mother's estate.

The respondent, the estate's executrix and trustee, resided in the property rent-free, refusing to sell it despite a will provision requiring sale within two years of death.

The court dismissed the application, finding the applicant lacked standing under the Partition Act as she only had a contingent interest in the estate's residue, not immediate possession of the property.

The court clarified that the Estates Administration Act does not automatically vest property in beneficiaries if the will grants the trustee discretion over sale, and the will's specific direction for sale after two years did not grant immediate possession of the property itself, only the sale proceeds.

The dismissal was without prejudice to the applicant seeking relief under the Trustee Act for removal and replacement of the trustee.

The applicant sought to prove the deceased's 2020 Will and inter vivos transfers, while the respondent filed a Notice of Objection alleging lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence regarding both the 2016 and 2020 Wills, as well as the transfers.

The court reviewed the evidence, applying the minimal evidentiary threshold test for suspicious circumstances.

The court found that the respondent failed to meet this threshold for any of her grounds, and the applicant successfully addressed any potential concerns.

The respondent's Notice of Objection was struck.

The applicant sought to remove the respondent as the sole estate trustee of the Estate of Mary Sullivan, primarily due to concerns regarding the authentication, evaluation, and sale of the "Sanders Portrait" a painting purportedly of William Shakespeare valued at USD $50,000,000.

The applicant alleged the respondent lacked expertise, acted diligently, and engaged in improper conduct.

The court dismissed the application, finding no compelling evidence that the respondent's administration endangered the estate, emphasizing that a testator's choice of trustee should not be lightly interfered with.

Costs were awarded against the applicant on a substantial indemnity basis due to unsubstantiated grave accusations.

Application and cross‑application concerning the validity of a life insurance change‑of‑beneficiary form executed shortly before the insured’s death.

The applicant sought a declaration that the 2011 form reallocating most of the insurance proceeds to her was valid, or alternatively rectification of the form.

The court held the form was not a valid declaration under the Insurance Act because the allocation percentages were altered after signing and the applicant failed to prove the insured signed the form as altered.

The court also found numerous suspicious circumstances surrounding the preparation of the document, rebutting the presumption that the insured knew and approved its contents.

The applicant failed to establish knowledge and approval or that the form reflected the insured’s true testamentary intentions.

Following Minutes of Settlement resolving estate litigation concerning farm property and estate assets, the parties disputed the interpretation of tax liability provisions in the settlement.

The responding party intended to pursue a tax strategy regarding estate filings and potential CRA assessments, while the moving party sought clarification and orders restricting what she characterized as a high-risk tax plan.

The court held that the Minutes of Settlement constituted a contract whose terms were clear and unambiguous when interpreted using standard contractual interpretation principles.

The agreement allocated full responsibility for tax restructuring, related transactions, and resulting liabilities to the responding party, including an obligation to indemnify the moving party and the estate trustee for any resulting liability.

The request for further clarification and restrictions was therefore dismissed.

In a guardianship proceeding under the Substitute Decisions Act involving competing powers of attorney and a dispute between siblings, the applicant sought orders compelling the respondent attorney to pass accounts, appointing an interim guardian of property, and adjournment of the guardianship application pending the accounting.

The court held that the motion was premature because documentary disclosure remained outstanding and cross-examinations had not yet occurred.

While attorneys are fiduciaries required to maintain and provide accounts under s. 32 of the Substitute Decisions Act, the evidentiary record was incomplete and untested.

The court directed the parties to exchange financial records and proceed with cross-examinations before seeking further relief.

The applicant sought an Order for Directions in an application challenging powers of attorney executed by his mother and seeking to replace the appointed attorneys for property and personal care.

The parties agreed to most procedural directions, including a capacity assessment, but disputed proposed terms requiring automatic production of extensive medical records and a lawyer’s file if incapacity were later found.

The court held the proposed production terms were premature, overly broad, and procedurally improper because non‑parties affected by the order had not been served.

The court emphasized the distinctions in the Substitute Decisions Act between capacity to grant powers of attorney and incapacity to manage property or personal care.

The contested production terms were refused and directions were issued for capacity assessments and procedural steps in the application.

The applicants sought removal of the estate trustee under ss. 5 and 37 of the Trustee Act and the appointment of a replacement trustee.

The court reviewed the governing principle that removal of a trustee depends primarily on the welfare of the beneficiaries and whether the continuation of the trustee would impair proper administration of the trust.

Evidence showed escalating hostility between the estate trustee and beneficiaries, questionable handling of estate assets, and conduct demonstrating disregard for the beneficiaries’ interests.

The court concluded that the level of animosity and breakdown in trust would prevent proper administration of the estate and ongoing trust obligations.

The estate trustee was removed and an independent lawyer was appointed as replacement trustee.

Motion seeking approval of Minutes of Settlement under Rule 7.08(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of a mentally incapable adult and for judgment implementing the settlement terms between her three sons.

The settlement arose from mediation resolving disputes concerning a family trust and a prior transfer of Spanish real property.

A dispute later arose regarding the wording of an acknowledgement required by the settlement, leading one party to withdraw a prior approval motion and threaten to resile from the agreement.

The court found the refusal to accept the original wording and withdrawal of the approval motion unreasonable, concluding it necessitated the moving party’s motion to finalize approval.

The settlement was approved and costs were awarded to the moving party, with part payable personally by the party whose conduct caused the additional proceedings.

Siblings of the respondent brought a motion seeking declarations that a gratuitous transfer of a deceased parent’s home into joint tenancy with one child was void for undue influence or, alternatively, subject to a resulting trust in favour of the estate.

The court reviewed the doctrines of undue influence and the presumption of resulting trust in the context of gratuitous inter vivos transfers from parent to child.

Evidence from the drafting solicitor and a neighbour demonstrated that the deceased independently intended the transfer and understood its consequences.

The presumption of undue influence was not established and, in any event, was rebutted.

The evidence also rebutted the presumption of resulting trust by demonstrating a clear intention to gift the property to the respondent through joint tenancy.

The applicant sought an order under s. 79 of the Substitute Decisions Act requiring a capacity assessment of an elderly parent and alternatively production of medical records and the drafting solicitor’s file relating to a power of attorney.

The proceeding arose in the context of a guardianship application and concerns regarding dementia and Parkinson’s disease.

The court held that although a guardianship proceeding was pending, the evidentiary record did not establish reasonable grounds to believe the individual was incapable.

Medical correspondence confirmed diagnoses but did not address the degree of incapacity.

Given the presumption of capacity and the absence of compelling evidence, the request for a court‑ordered assessment and related production was denied.

In a contested estates proceeding, the applicants sought directions under Rule 75.06 concerning the proper party required to propound a 2013 will of the deceased.

The respondent challenged the validity of the will on the grounds of lack of testamentary capacity and undue influence and requested that the applicants be required to propound it.

The court held that the applicants had “intermeddled” in the estate by taking substantive steps such as applying for a certificate of appointment and administering assets, which precluded them from renouncing their role.

As the individuals most involved in the preparation and execution of the will, they were required to propound it.

The court also directed a trial of issues regarding testamentary capacity and undue influence while declining to adjudicate negligence and fiduciary duty claims within the directions motion.

In an estate dispute, the respondent sought removal of the applicant as estate trustee, while the applicant brought a cross‑motion seeking the respondent’s removal.

The dispute arose from significant conflict between the deceased’s spouse and daughter over the administration of the estate and the disposition of the estate’s principal asset, shares in a nail salon business.

The court reviewed the governing principles for removal of trustees, emphasizing that clear evidence of necessity and risk to the proper administration of the estate is required, and that hostility alone is insufficient.

Given the contradictory affidavit evidence and the absence of clear proof that the estate’s administration was endangered, the court declined to remove either trustee.

Directions were ordered for the sale of the estate’s business interests and for related claims to proceed to trial.

Competing motions arose regarding funding the care of an incapable elderly woman under the Substitute Decisions Act.

One child sought to increase a line of credit secured against the incapable person’s Toronto condominium to fund ongoing care, while other siblings sought an order to sell a Florida condominium allegedly jointly owned with one sibling.

The court held that the urgent need to maintain care justified extending the line of credit, while disputes concerning ownership, expenses, occupation rent, and tax consequences relating to the Florida property required further evidentiary determination.

A bifurcated hearing was ordered to resolve those issues before determining whether the Florida property should be sold.

A municipality brought an ex parte application seeking to dispense with service on deceased trustees and to vest title to a parcel of land in the municipality free of a historic trust.

The land had been transferred in 1923 to trustees to hold in trust for use as a public hall for the community.

The court held that the arrangement constituted a valid charitable purpose trust that did not lapse merely because the trustees were deceased or the trust had been poorly administered.

Where the charitable purpose may have become impracticable, the proper approach is a cy‑pres scheme, and the Public Guardian and Trustee must be served under the Charities Accounting Act.

The requested vesting order could not be granted and the application was dismissed without prejudice to a renewed application with proper notice.

The defendant brought a motion to strike the plaintiffs’ claim concerning a transfer of real property allegedly gifted by the parties’ parents to the defendant.

The plaintiffs alleged the transfer should be voided based on mental incapacity of the donors, undue influence, and alleged oral promises that the property would pass to them as part of an estate plan.

The court reviewed the test for striking pleadings under Rule 21 and the “plain and obvious” standard.

While certain arguments based on the Statute of Frauds and evidentiary issues were premature at the pleading stage, the court concluded that the plaintiffs lacked standing and that the pleadings could not sustain the relief sought.

The motion to strike was allowed and costs were awarded to the defendant.

The applicant, a grandson of the deceased who died intestate, sought a declaration that bank and investment accounts held jointly between the deceased and her surviving son formed part of the estate.

The respondent son argued that the accounts were joint with right of survivorship and therefore passed to him outside the estate.

Applying the presumption of resulting trust articulated in Pecore v. Pecore, the court held that the respondent failed to rebut the presumption with sufficient evidence of the deceased’s intention to gift survivorship rights.

The evidence consisted largely of the respondent’s self‑serving assertions and unsupported bank correspondence, while documentary banking records and other objective indicators of intention were absent.

The court concluded the jointly held funds reverted to the estate and were to be distributed pursuant to the intestacy regime under the Succession Law Reform Act.

In an estates proceeding involving an application to pass accounts, a beneficiary brought a motion seeking disclosure of bank records from several years before the estate trustees assumed their roles.

The moving party argued that substantial proceeds from the sale of the deceased’s home appeared unaccounted for and requested that the estate trustees sign releases permitting access to earlier bank records.

The court held that estate trustees are not obligated to investigate or disclose financial records predating their fiduciary responsibilities absent evidence linking them to alleged improprieties.

The evidentiary record did not establish a reasonable basis to infer wrongdoing or missing funds.

The motion for disclosure was dismissed.