I practise in the area of estate litigation and am often reminded of the importance of having a clearly drafted Will.
A good recent example comes from the decision in Poole v Dailey, 2020 SKQB 226.
The deceased had left his estate between his two children, Brian and Patricia, on the below terms:
- Patricia was to receive the home at Regina Beach provided she met certain conditions. The clause read as follows:
Further, provided that my said daughter takes physical possession of the said residential property within three months from the date of my death and occupies that property as her residence, then I direct that the said residential property and all contents shall be transferred to my said daughter, to be hers absolutely, subject only to any mortgage which may be registered against the property at the date of my death.
- the residue was then to be shared equally between Brian and Patricia.
The issue before the Court in Poole was thus: Had Patricia taken physical possession of the Regina Beach home, within 3 months of Earl’s death on August 1, 2015?
Regrettably, the Will did not define in black and white terms, what would trigger a finding of “occupancy” or “residency”.
A trial was held. The parties each called evidence to support their own position. Brian argued that Patricia had not resided in the home within 3 months. He relied on:
- the fact that he often drove by the home during the relevant period, and did not often note evidence of Patricia residing at the home;
- The water metre readings that Brian had recorded from the home. Brian suggested that an average person uses 100 gallons of water a day.
However, the Court did not find that Brian had qualified himself as an expert witness, for the purpose of introducing expert testimony.
Patricia in turn argued that she had in fact resided in the home within 3 months. She relied on the below:
- over the course of August and September 2015, she had moved her things out of the home in Regina, and into the home at Regina Beach;
- Patricia had reconnected with a girlfriend from high school, at Regina Beach and entertained her cousins in her home at Regina Beach. Patricia’s friend testified to this;
- There was nothing in the evidence that suggested that Patricia was not being truthful about her occupation of the Regina Beach home.
Ultimately, the Court, therefore, found that Patricia had in fact occupied the Regina Beach home, as prescribed by the will. As such, Patricia Dailey was entitled to absolute title of the property.
Poole offers a practical lesson on the importance of having a carefully defined Will. Here, the costly proceeding could perhaps have been avoided had the Will defined what exact criteria would constitute “occupancy” or “residency”.
The Court’s ruling on costs:
Interestingly, the Court in Poole did not award Patricia her legal costs out of the Estate. The Court held that the proceeding was intended to advance Patricia’s personal interests in the estate. As such, Patricia’s legal fees should not be borne by the estate.
This finding may attract comment. Traditionally, in estate matters, legal fees for successful parties have often been awarded out of the estate. Moreover, they are often paid on the “solicitor client” scale (meaning dollar for dollar costs). The reasoning has traditionally been that the estate should bear the cost of any proceeding aimed at determining the true intention of the deceased, or, of any proceeding caused by an ambiguity for which the deceased was responsible. Such traditional reasoning would have appeared to apply equally in Poole.
It is too early to tell if the costs aspect of Poole may be an outlier decision, or, if it signals a broader departure in Saskatchewan from the prior approach to legal costs in estate matters.
Contacting a Lawyer on this Subject
James Steele’s preferred practise area is estate litigation, including will challenges, executor disputes, power of attorney issues, etc. Contact James Steele at 1-306-933-1338 or j.steele@rslaw.com. The above is for general information only, and not legal advice. Parties should always seek legal advice prior to taking action in specific situations.
Related News and Articles
Robertson Stromberg Lawyers Recognized in the 2025 Edition of the Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory
Congratulations to Misty S. Alexandre, M. Kim Anderson, K.C., Christopher J.H. Donald, K.C., Jared D. Epp, Tiffany M. Paulsen, K.C., Jennifer D. Pereira, K.C., Leslie W. Prosser, K.C., and Sean M. Sinclair, who have been recognized by their peers in the Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory for 2023.
James Steele Presents to Law Students
James Steele will be presenting to law students at the University of Saskatchewan today. Students in Wills will hear from James on the topic of estate litigation from a practitioner’s perspective.Related News and Articles
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Concentra Trust v Calvary United Church, 2024 SKKB 139
The recent Saskatchewan King’s Bench decision in Concentra Trust v Calvary United Church, displays the Court’s power to save a charitable gift in a Will, so that an estate gift still flows to another charitable object which closely resembles the testator’s original...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Levesque v Klarenbach, 2024 SKKB 130
The recent Saskatchewan King’s Bench decision in Levesque v Klarenbach, offers a reminder of the limits that some judges may impose on an application to compel disclosure from a power of attorney.Background: The background of Levesque involved the below facts: Darlene...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Miller v Miller Estate, 2024 SKCA 70
The recent Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision in Miller v Miller Estate, 2024 SKCA 70, confronted the issue of when a party, who seeks to appeal a decision made by a Chambers judge, first requires leave to appeal. For context, in order to appeal certain decisions...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Walker v Hunter, 2024 SKCA 34
This post discusses the recent decision of the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan in Walker v Hunter, 2024 SKCA 34. This decision offers an illustration of when a lawsuit may be struck out, on the basis that it is statute barred (i.e. commenced too late). Such a...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Haines v Kuffner Estate, 2024 SKKB 51
The recent Saskatchewan King’s Bench decision in Haines v Kuffner Estate is an example of the Court’s ability to validate a document, which may not have been executed with all the normal formalities. This flexibility offers the ability to ensure, as far as possible,...
Join James Steele for a Law Society of Saskatchewan CPD Replay – When Estates Go to Court: Recent Saskatchewan Decisions
Several recent Saskatchewan decisions provide guidance on various estate law topics. These include issues related to estate administration, as well as more contentious issues such as will challenges. This webinar summarizes some of the recent Saskatchewan decisions...
Robertson Stromberg Lawyers Recognized in the 2024 Edition of the Canadian Legal Lexpert® Directory
Congratulations to Misty S. Alexandre, M. Kim Anderson, K.C., Christopher J.H. Donald, K.C., Jared D. Epp, Tiffany M. Paulsen, K.C., Jennifer D. Pereira, K.C., Leslie W. Prosser, K.C., and Sean M. Sinclair, who have been recognized by their peers in the Canadian Legal Lexpert Directory for 2023.
James Steele Presents at Canadian Bar Association (Sask) Mid-Winter Meeting
Join James Steele at the Canadian Bar Association (Saskatchewan)’s Mid Winter Meeting in Regina on January 25, 2024. James will be addressing amendments to Part 16 of the King’s Bench Rules and their implication on estate administration. 2024 Mid-Winter Meeting...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Hunt v Hunt, 2023 SKKB 190
The recent Saskatchewan King’s Bench decision in Hunt v Hunt, 2023 SKKB 190 confronted a rather unique circumstance. The question was whether an executor who has renounced her right to probate an estate, can later rescind that renunciation. In the situation in Hunt,...
Saskatchewan Estate Litigation Update: Gilchrist v Gilchrist, 2023 SKKB 187
The recent Saskatchewan King’s Bench decision in Gilchrist v Gilchrist, 2023 SKKB 187 offers a reminder of the importance of updating your will. If you do not update your will, and certain beneficiaries named in your will have died before you, the legal outcome may be...