Tag: podcast
Hull on Estates #562 – Revisiting the Pecore Principles: Tiedemann v Tiedemann
In today’s podcast, Paul and Garrett discuss the decision in Tiedemann v Tiedemann and revisit some legal principles from the Pecore decision that are often overlooked in light of the well-known analysis on the presumption of resulting trust.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #557 – Milne Estate and the Validity of Multiple Wills
In today’s podcast, Paul Trudelle and Sayuri Kagami discuss the recent decision of Re Milne Estate, 2018 ONSC 4174, where Justice Dunphy of the Ontario Superior Court found a Will to be invalid where it provided the Estate Trustee with the discretion to determine whether assets might fall under the Will or not. At the time of recording, it was unknown whether the decision would be appealed. It is now confirmed that the decision is under appeal.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #556 – Steele v Smith: Missing Beneficiaries and Remedies for the Estate Trustee
This week on Hull on Estates, Noah Weisberg and Garrett Horrocks review the decision in Steele v Smith, 2018 ONSC 4601, and discuss Benjamin Orders as a remedy for the estate trustee in the event that a beneficiary cannot be located.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #554 – Golden Rule for Assessing Testamentary Capacity
This week on Hull on Estates, Noah Weisberg and Doreen So discuss the UK and Hong Kong Golden Rule for assessing testamentary capacity.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #553 – Who is the Children’s Lawyer?
This week on Hull on Estates, Jonathon Kappy and Nick Esterbauer discuss the role of the Children’s Lawyer in Ontario and the recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Ontario (Children’s Lawyer) v Ontario (Information and Privacy Commissioner).
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #552 – Distribution in light of a number of potential Wills
In today’s podcast, Paul Trudelle and Rebecca Rauws discuss the recent decision of Eissmann v Kuntz, 2018 ONSC 3650 and the distribution of an estate in light of a number of potential Wills.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #551 – The admissibility of an expert’s evidence
In today’s podcast, Natalia Angelini and Kira Domratchev discuss the Ontario Court of Appeal decision of Dujardin v Dujardin, 2018 ONCA 597, and the admissibility of an expert’s evidence with respect to the deceased’s capacity.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #550 – Damages in Passing of Accounts of Attorneys for Property
In today’s podcast, Stuart Clark and Sayuri Kagami discuss the issue of whether damages can be claimed on a passing of an attorney for property’s accounts in light of the fact that section 49(3) of the Estates Act, RSO 1990, c E21 only refers to the ability of a Judge to award damages against an executor, administrator, or trustee, not an attorney for property, in such proceedings. To read about this issue, see Stuart Clark’s recent blog on this topic.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates # 549 – Modernizing the Test for Testamentary Capacity
In today’s podcast, Noah Weisberg and Garrett Horrocks discuss whether the Banks v Goodfellow test for testamentary capacity is in need of an update given current trends in medical science and in the increased complexity of asset holdings.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.
Hull on Estates #548 – Four Corners versus Armchair
In today’s podcast, Jonathon Kappy and Kira Domratchev discuss the British Columbia Court of Appeal decision of Killam v Killam (2018) BCCA 64, and the “four corners” approach versus the “armchair” approach in interpreting the testator’s intention.
Should you have any questions, please email us at webmaster@hullandhull.com or leave a comment on our blog.