Demographics driving rise in POA litigation

January 11, 2018 Suzana Popovic-Montag advocatedaily 0 Comments
Estates & Wills & Trusts

Demographics driving rise in POA litigation

By Staff


Suzana Popovic-Montag

Disputes among attorneys will increasingly come before Canadian courts as the country’s population continues to age, says Toronto estates and trusts lawyer Suzana Popovic-Montag.

In a recent decision, Superior Court Justice David Price ruled in a case that pitted an elderly man’s attorney for personal care against one of his joint attorneys for property.

The man, who suffered from Alzheimer’s, had appointed his two sons under a power of attorney (POA) for property before moving into a retirement home, while his daughter was named in his POA for personal care.

Popovic-Montag, managing partner of Hull & Hull LLP, tells that POA litigation is a growing practice area for lawyers in the field.

“People are living longer, which means they are more likely to be in situations where they need attorneys for personal care and property,” she says.

In addition, Popovic-Montag says the chances of disagreement are enhanced because it’s common for people to split the roles so that a number of individuals can be responsible for an incapable person’s affairs.

“You can get into situations where there is a power struggle between attorneys, who may have different views on the best interests of the person,” she says.

“This was a classic example,” Popovic-Montag adds, referring to Price’s decision.

The siblings in the case ran into trouble when their father’s retirement home recommended his relocation to a secure long-term care facility.

While the sister, who was responsible for the father’s personal care, wanted to hire a personal support worker until the man could be moved to the new facility, one of her brothers, who maintained control over the father’s bank account, resisted the changes.

He told his sister that he would suspend payment of his father’s retirement home fees, and suggested an alternative retirement residence. This prompted her to apply to have her brother removed as the father’s joint attorney for property.

After mediation, the decision says, the brother agreed, among other things, to provide financial information to a third sibling and to consult an expert for guidance in choosing the father’s future care facility. A motion to have him found in breach of the agreement could not be heard before the father died.

Price’s decision ordered the brother to pay his siblings $50,000 for the costs of the litigation up until their father’s death, noting that he had interfered with his sister’s ability to perform her role as attorney for personal care.

“It was a costly and time consuming exercise which, ultimately, proved unnecessary. For this reason, [the brother] will be required to pay [his siblings’] costs personally, and on a full indemnity basis,” Price wrote.

To Read More Suzana Popovic-Montag Posts Click Here

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.



Hull e-State Planner is a comprehensive estate planning software designed to make the estate planning process simple, efficient and client friendly.

Try it here!




  • This Monday, @ihull joined Avi Charney of Charney Legal on his podcast: Speak to a Lawyer. In the interview, they d…
  • Should you have co-executors for your will? Today’s article explores the advantages and disadvantages of naming mu…
  • Bob Ross: A Not-So-Happy Mistake Last Wednesday’s article discusses Bob Ross's estate. Read the full blog here:…
  • Read today's article: The “Appropriate Means” factor under section 5 of the Limitations Act, 2002. Full blog here:…
  • The September issue of The Probater is now available! Calmusky v Calmusky and Mak (Estate) v Mak: What is the Stat…
  • Read today's article: The lasting cognitive impact on 9/11’s Ground Zero first responders. Full blog here:…