Tag: section 60

Can My Spouse Challenge My Decision to Exclude Him or Her from My Will?

In a prior post, it was discussed what may arise from a decision to exclude your children from your Will and so today’s topic will cover: What may arise from your decision to exclude your spouse?

Section 60 of the Wills Estates Succession Act (“WESA”) empowers a court to vary the terms of a Will that does not make adequate provision for the Will-maker’s spouse (including common law spouse) where such spouse makes an application to the court for a variation of the Will-maker’s Will. To quote:

S.60. Despite any law or enactment to the contrary, if a Will-maker dies leaving a Will that does not, in the court’s opinion, make adequate provision for the proper maintenance and support of the Will-maker’s spouse or children, the court may, in a proceeding by or on behalf of the spouse or children, order that the provision that it thinks adequate, just and equitable in the circumstances be made out of the Will-maker’s estate for the spouse or children.

The words “adequate”, “just” and “equitable” have been judicially considered by the Courts and have determined that the Will-maker’s Will must satisfy the Will-maker’s legal and moral obligations to the surviving spouse.

When determining what the Will-maker’s legal obligations are to the surviving spouse, the Courts will look to what the surviving spouse would have received if the parties had separated and then look to what the surviving spouse’s entitlement would be under the mean. BC courts have measured “adequate, just and equitable” by comparing what the surviving spouse received under the Will with what they would have been entitled to under the Family Law Act of British Columbia. This means in cases of long term marriages where assets were intermingled, the surviving spouse’s claim to a share of the Will-maker’s estate is stronger than those of a spouse who was married to the Will-maker for a short period of time and whose finances were separate from the Will-maker.

When determining what the Will-maker’s moral obligations are to the surviving spouse, the Court will consider whether the provisions of the Will-maker’s Will are within society’s reasonable expectations of what a judicious person would do in the circumstances by reference to contemporary community standards.

In light of the afore-going, you would think it would take a fairly unique set of facts for a Court to uphold a Will-maker’s decision to entirely exclude a long term spouse from being a beneficiary under the terms of the Will but the Courts have in fact done so where the parties, in a second marriage, maintained separate finances and the Will-maker make provision for the surviving spouse to live in the home for as long as the surviving spouse wanted.

Ultimately, the question of whether a Court will uphold the Will-maker’s decision to exclude or limit a spouse’s entitlement to the estate will depend on the specific facts surrounding the marriage of the parties and the provisions of the Will-maker’s Will.

If you or a loved one has been excluded from an estate of a spouse or parent, timely legal advice and representation can be had by contacting Vancouver/Burnaby inheritance and estate litigation law lawyer Andrew Rebane at Resolutions Law Corporation, andrew@resolutionslawcorp.com or 778-372-7107.

Does an Adopted Child have Rights to their Birth Parent’s Estate?

According to section 60 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA), if a Will-maker dies leaving a Will that does not make adequate provision for the Will-maker’s children, the Will-maker’s children may start a proceeding to vary the Will and have the Court order a more adequate, just, and equitable provision to be made out to them from the Will-maker’s estate.

What if you are an adopted child and you feel that your birth parent’s Will does not make adequate provision for you? Would you be able to vary the Will under section 60 of the WESA?

This question was considered in British Columbia Supreme Court case Boer v Mikaloff, 2017 BCSC 21. The Court ultimately decided that it would not be possible to vary the Will under section 60 of the WESA, considering section 37(1)(c) of the British Columbia Adoption Act, which states that birth parents cease to have any parental rights or obligations with respect to the adopted child. In this particular situation, the Plaintiff was not considered a child of his birth mother.

The Court also considered section 3(2)(a) of the WESA, which states that a child is not entitled to the estate of their pre-adoption parent except through the Will of that pre-adoption parent. This led the Court to the conclusion that a child is essentially in the same position as a non-family member when it comes to their entitlement in their birth parents’ Wills.

Taking both of these sections into account, the Court decided that an adopted child would not be able to take advantage of section 60 of the WESA since the child is technically no longer the child of their birth parent, and retains no rights to their birth parent’s estate other than what is specifically made out to them in their Will.

If you or a loved one are in need of advice regarding Wills and Estates or wish to have assistance in making a Will or challenge a Will, consult Vancouver and Burnaby Wills & Estates lawyer Andrew Rebane at Resolutions Law Corporation, Burnaby, British Columbia at andrew@resolutionslawcorp.com or 778-372-7107.