Warning: Attempt to read property "ID" on null in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/richtertriallaw-production/public/wp-content/themes/richter/archive.php on line 16
In Kyle Estate v. Kyle, 2017 BCSC 752, a son whose brother stole money from his dad’s estate was recently awarded over $450,000 in special costs against the offending brother. A father left significant gifts to 4 bothers and named the offending brother as the executor. Unfortunately, that brother transferred significant amounts of money from the estate account into his own personal account and misled the other family members of the estate. After a trial, the offending brother was removed as the executor and another brother was appointed in his place. The offending brother was also ordered to pay over $450,000 back into his dad’s estate in compensation for the funds that were taken.
Begin successful at trial, the plaintiff was entitled to costs. However, he sought special costs and double costs for the offending brother’s theft. Mr. Justice Burnyeat was tasked with determining whether the plaintiff could get both special and double costs under the Supreme Court Civil Rules.
Mr. Justice Burnyeat referred to Panghali Estate v. Panghali, 2014 BCSC 647 for the principle that special costs, like the ones sought by the plaintiff, are available for misconduct in the course of the litigation itself. Strictly speaking, this would mean that only misconduct that took place after the litigation itself was started could form the basis of an award for special costs. Since the offending brother’s misconduct occurred prior to the start of the claim, it would not normally attract an award of special costs.
However, he noted that special costs can be awarded where pre-litigation conduct also warrants rebuke. Additionally, additional authorities have established that beneficiaries, like the plaintiff, may obtain an award of Special Costs against the executor personally if that executor has acted dishonestly and breached their obligations as trustee. Additionally, if the executor also receives a gift under the will, these costs can be ordered out of his share of the estate. (Gutierrez Estate v. Gutierrez, 2015 BCSC 185; Szpradowski (Guardian ad litem of) v. Szpradowski Estate (1992), 44 E.T.R. 89, 4 C.P.C. (3d) 21 (B.C.S.C.); Robillard v. Robillard Estate, 2015 BCSC 2011.) The principle behind this is the unfairness to the estate or the beneficiaries from bearing the legal costs of trying to repair the dishonest actions of the executor.
Mr. Justice Burnyeat found that the offending brother breached his fiduciary duty before and during the litigation “without abatement and without apology” and that it was appropriate to award special costs of over $450,000 against him. He further ordered that the offending brother must personally pay that money to the plaintiff or that money will taken out of the offending brother’s share of his dad’s estate.
Mr. Justice Burnyeat referred to the court of appeal’s ruling in Insurance Corp. of British Columbia v. Eurosport Auto Co., 2007 BCCA 279 for the principle that where special costs are awarded, double costs are not available. Although Eurosport was decided under the former Supreme Court Civil Rules, he found that the new Supreme Court Civil Rules did not make a specific reference to party and party costs when dealing with the question of whether double Special costs would be available. He noted that subsequent decisions such as Hochsteiner v. Kilback, 2014 BCSC 167 have concluded that the same principle applies under the new rules.
In light of his award for special costs, Mr. Justiec Burnyeat held that double costs were not available. However, he further held that if he was incorrect in awarding special costs, he would order double costs.
Richter Trial Lawyers are your Vancouver Estate Lawyers for varying a will and dealing with executors.
In Kyle Estate v. Kyle, 2017 BCSC 752, a son whose brother stole money from his dad’s estate was recently awarded over $450,000 in special costs against the offending brother. A father left significant gifts to 4 bothers and named the offending brother as the executor. Unfortunately, that brother transferred significant amounts of money from […]
British Columbia’s new wills regime, the Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA) came into force on March 31, 2014 to revise and replace the outdated Estate Administration Act, Probate Recognition Act, Wills Act, and the Wills Variation Act. WESA is still brand new and many of its provision are still being interpreted for the first […]
Common questions that people have in British Columbia estate law include: “Is a draft will legal” or “binding” or “valid”? This article attempts to give some guidance on how to answer those questions. In British Columbia, for a will to be valid, it must meet the requirements found in Section 37 of the Wills, Estates […]
A recent court of appeal decision makes it clear that evidence of a full and complete gift (rather than resulting trust) does not necessarily mean a “deed of gift”. The recent court of appeal case regarding the McKendry Estate involved Mary McKendry (deceased), her 5 children (4 daughters 1 son), and the Vancouver property purchased by […]
In BC, the Family Law Act and Wills, Estates and Succession Act define the term spouse by reference to the term “separation”. Under WESA, section 2 provides that spouses cease to be spouses as follows: If they are married, on separation as it is considered under the FLA; or If they are living in a common […]
British Columbia wills variation lawyers have pause to remember one of the great warriors of the past. One of the seminal decisions for the unique British Columbia statutory provision giving the court authority to change a will is the now 83-year-old Supreme Court of Canada Contested Will Claim Walker v. McDermott  SCR 94. This […]
Beyond a consideration of the competing legal claims are the moral claims which the courts must consider in deciding a Wills Variation Act claim. These moral claims are usually more individual and specific than legal claims and can include the most varied considerations, some of which be assured/implied expectations, disability and financial circumstances. It will […]
The most intriguing part of the Wills Variation Act (now the Wills, Estates and Succession Act) is that “adequate provision for the proper maintenance and support” and “adequate, just and equitable” is judged in light of contemporary community standards, legal and moral. These legal and moral standards are different in different parts of our country, different in […]
It was the earlier lobbying of women’s groups in the early 20th century that was responsible for the enactment of the first Wills Variation Act (now the Wills Estates and Succession Act). The evolving rights and role of women in society has continued to stand behind the interpretation of the Wills Variation Act by the […]
Beneficiaries have to be able to trust their trustee. Period. Trusts occur in different ways: Automatically by operation of the law, by express written document, or by express unwritten agreement. Sometimes trustees don’t know they’re trustees because the trust has arisen automatically by operation of the law. That is no excuse. The relationship between a […]
Estate litigation lawyers use part of the Wills Estates and Succession Act (or WESA, formerly the Wills Variation Act) when varying wills. In British Columbia, wives, husbands and children are protected from their parents or spouses writing wills and leaving their assets in a way that offends contemporary community standards. Section 60 of WESA (formerly Section […]