The distribution of a loved one’s estate can often lead to emotional and legal challenges, as was seen in a recent case involving Mrs. Law’s will. This case highlights how British Columbia’s Wills, Estates and Succession Act (“WESA“) can address inequities in estate distribution and ensure fairness according to contemporary standards.

Case Overview: The Parties and the 2018 Will

In the case of Lam v Law Estate, Mrs. Law, passed away leaving behind two adult children, Ginny and William. In her final will, created in 2018, Mrs. Law designated the family home as a joint tenancy with William and specified that the remaining estate would be divided equally between her two children.

However, this seemingly equal division was complicated by Mrs. Law’s prior actions and historical patterns of giving. Over the years, she made significant inter-vivos gifts (gifts made during her lifetime) to William, which created a vast disparity in the distribution of her wealth.

Mrs. Law’s Previous Wills and Lifetime Gifts

The 1999 Will

Mrs. Law and her late husband created mirroring wills in 1999. These wills distributed their estates equally between Ginny and William upon the death of the surviving spouse. At the time, the family’s assets included the family home, three rental properties, and various savings and investments. After her husband’s death, Mrs. Law inherited all of the family wealth.

The 2004 Will

In 2004, Mrs. Law significantly altered her estate plan, creating a will that disinherited Ginny, save for a modest gift of $2,000, leaving the remainder of her estate to William.

Lifetime Wealth Transfers

Between 1999 and 2018, Mrs. Law transferred substantial assets to William. These transfers included:

• Proceeds from the sale of two rental properties,
• Designating William as a beneficiary on various accounts, and
• Placing the family home and personal bank accounts into joint tenancy with William.

By the time of her passing, William had received over $2.2 million in assets (78% of the family’s wealth), while Ginny received just $600,000 (22%).

Ginny’s Claim for Wills Variation

Following Mrs. Law’s death, Ginny sought to vary the 2018 Will under Section 60 of WESA. This section allows a child or spouse to request a variation if the will does not provide adequate, just, and equitable provision for their maintenance and support.

The Court’s Findings and Decision

Disparities in Care and Contribution

The Court acknowledged that both Ginny and William were loyal children, but noted that Ginny had provided greater care and support for Mrs. Law, particularly in relation to her medical needs. Despite this, Mrs. Law’s estate distribution heavily favored William, reflecting a gender-based bias.

Contemporary Standards and Testamentary Autonomy

While the Court recognized the importance of testamentary autonomy, it emphasized that autonomy must align with modern societal norms. The Court drew on the principles established in Tataryn v Tataryn Estate, asserting that a will must reflect “adequate, just, and equitable” provisions based on contemporary standards.

Gender Bias in Estate Planning

The evidence demonstrated that Mrs. Law’s decisions were influenced by a belief that sons deserved more than daughters. The Court ruled that this perspective fell short of contemporary standards of fairness and equity.

“Contemporary justice does not countenance preferential treatment towards certain children over others based on their gender.”

The Court’s Order

To correct the inequity, the Court varied the 2018 Will, awarding Ginny 85% of the primary estate asset and William 15%.

Need Assistance with Wills Variation in British Columbia?

If you have questions about wills, estate distribution, or your rights under British Columbia’s Wills, Estates, and Succession Act, we are here to help. We can guide you through the complexities of estate planning and litigation to ensure your rights are protected.