We tend to think of estate planning in terms of houses, bank accounts, and investment portfolios. But a growing share of what we own exists online—cryptocurrency, cloud-stored documents, email archives, social media accounts, online businesses, and digital subscriptions. When someone dies, accessing those assets can be far more difficult than anyone expects.
This tension was a central theme of M. Jasmine Sweatman’s paper at the Six-Minute Estates Lawyer program in April 2026. It was also recently raised in a decision of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta in Wada Estate (Re), 2026 ABKB 309, which offers both a cautionary tale for tech giants and a potential tool for practitioners across Canada. Importantly, it signals a need for legislative reform.
The Problem: Tech Power vs. Estate Authority
Sweatman identifies a fundamental challenge: digital assets don’t behave like traditional property. They can’t be physically possessed. They’re controlled through passwords and encryption, governed by private contracts rather than public law, and stored across multiple jurisdictions. When an account holder dies, the executor often has no simple way in—not because the law doesn’t authorize access, but because the tech platform won’t cooperate.
There are barriers estate trustees face regularly: inaccessible cryptocurrency wallets, locked cloud accounts, non-transferable digital libraries, and social media platforms that refuse to release account contents. Estates risk losing substantial value, and executors face uncertainty about the scope of their duties.
The deeper concern is structural. Terms of service frequently prohibit account transfer, restrict post-death access, and limit disclosure—even to court-appointed estate representatives. As Sweatman puts it, this “shifts power from courts and legislatures to private technology companies,” raising questions about fairness and the erosion of public legal authority.
Help from Wada Estate
Wada Estate brings these issues into practical focus. The deceased had not designated an Apple “legacy contact”—a feature allowing a named individual to access the account after death. His administrators sought control of his Apple accounts and provided Apple with a grant of administration along with the specific information Apple requested.
Apple refused. It insisted on a further, separately formatted court order—essentially demanding the estate return to court for a redundant piece of paper.
Justice Feasby held that the grant of administration was itself a court order confirming the administrators’ full legal authority over the deceased’s assets, including digital ones. Apple was required to deal with the administrators as it would have dealt with the deceased. There was no legal basis for demanding anything more.
Justice Feasby issued written reasons—unusual for an unopposed application—specifically to put technology companies on notice:
“This Court is not in the business of issuing duplicative orders to assuage risk averse technology companies who are unwilling to learn the laws of the jurisdictions in which they do business.”
He warned that companies demanding redundant court orders should be prepared to explain why they should not pay solicitor-and-own-client costs.
What This Means for Ontario
Wada Estate is an Alberta decision and not binding in Ontario. But its reasoning carries persuasive weight and could be another part of the estates practitioner’s toolkit. With a risk of costs consequences, a tech company may be more willing to cooperate and accept a certificate of appointment of estate trustee as sufficient.
That said, Ontario still lacks the comprehensive statutory framework that would eliminate these disputes. Sweatman advocates for legislation modelled on the American Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act, which would grant fiduciaries clear statutory rights to access and manage digital property. A similar framework has been implemented in New Brunswick under the Fiduciaries Access to Digital Assets Act and proposed by the Alberta Law Reform Institute in their Access to Digital Assets report.
Until the Ontario legislature acts, executors will continue to experience uncertainty with digital assets and it will be necessary for practitioners to continue to navigate these issues case by case, relying on general principles, Wada Estate, and judicial discretion.
Thank you for reading and have a great week!
By Jordyn Sanford