Dealing with tangible assets of an estate can often be difficult, and can lead an estate administration into contentious litigation. This can be so even when the asset has no real monetary value. Take, for example, the recent decision of Rhodes v. Myers, 2021 BCSC 2043. There, the deceased died leaving her estate to her 4 children equally. Two of the children, A and B, were estate trustees. Estate Trustee A moved to have the estate trustee B removed.
(The court noted that even before the deceased died, there were disputes and disagreements between the children. As we often see, the disputes and disagreements only increased after the deceased died.)
Back to the litigation, estate trustee B agreed to be removed, on the condition that a “bolt ring”, which was made for the deceased by her late husband, and which she never took off, go to another child, C, in accordance with the wishes of the deceased. Estate Trustee A took the position that the issue of the bolt ring should be dealt with later. Alternatively, she argued that the bolt ring was given to her by the deceased.
The court held that the issue of the bolt ring could be dealt with in the current litigation. This would avoid further future litigation, and would be consistent with the principles of proportionality and the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of the proceeding on its merits.
With respect to Estate Trustee A’s assertion of a gift, the court found that, based on the evidence, the deceased did not have sufficient mental capacity when the gift was allegedly made.
The bolt ring (which, as I understand it, actually looks like a nut) was said to have no monetary value, but tremendous sentimental value to the children. These types of issues cannot be ignored and can result in costly litigation. Estate trustees, beneficiaries and their counsel must be cognizant of these types of issues and their sensitive nature and take steps to ensure that they are, to the extent possible, dealt with reasonably and efficiently.
Thank you for reading.