Bellinger v. Nuytten Estate et al., 2002 BCSC 571

• Judge: Hood, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: June 11, 2002
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: 2002 BCSC 571;[2002] B.C.T.C. 571 (SC)

Bellinger v. Nuytten Estate, [2002] B.C.T.C. 571 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] B.C.T.C. TBEd. JL.013

Roy Bellinger (plaintiff) v. Kevin Fayers, Executor of the Will of Dorothy May Nuytten, also known as Dorothy Nuytten, deceased, Theophil Rene Nuytten, Beverly Porter, Paula Porter aka Paula Church, St. Pauls United Church, Todd Bellinger, Lori Bellinger aka Lori Nichols and Virginia Nuytten (defendants)

(A971813; 2002 BCSC 571)

Indexed As: Bellinger v. Nuytten Estate et al.

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Hood, J.

June 11, 2002.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Evidence - Topic 1527

Hearsay rule - Hearsay rule exceptions and exclusions - General - Where admission of hearsay necessary and evidence reliable - See paragraphs 181 to 194.

Family Law - Topic 6638

Dependents' relief legislation - Persons entitled to relief - Child - Adult children - See paragraphs 254 to 259.

Trusts - Topic 325

Creation of trust - Methods of creation - By agreement - General - See paragraphs 1 to 222.

Trusts - Topic 1527

Secret trusts - Creation of secret trust - What constitutes a secret trust - See paragraphs 223 to 235.

Wills - Topic 91

Testamentary instruments - Mutual wills - General (incl. what constitutes) - See paragraphs 1 to 222.

Wills - Topic 93

Testamentary instruments - Mutual wills - Joint wills - See paragraphs 1 to 222.

Cases Noticed:

Birmingham v. Renfrew (1937), 57 C.L.R. 666 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Khan, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 531; 113 N.R. 53; 41 O.A.C. 353; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 92; 79 C.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 183].

R. v. Smith (A.L.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 915; 139 N.R. 323; 55 O.A.C. 321; 75 C.C.C.(3d) 257; 94 D.L.R.(4th) 590; 15 C.R.(4th) 133, refd to. [para. 183].

R. v. Chahley (N.W.) (1992), 13 B.C.A.C. 213; 24 W.A.C. 213; 72 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 185].

Romaine v. Romaine et al., [2000] B.C.T.C. 459 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 185].

Oldham, Re, [1925] 1 Ch. 75, refd to. [para. 200].

Gray v. Perpetual Trustee Co., [1928] A.C. 391 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 200].

Dufour v. Pereira (1769), 21 E.R. 332 (L.C.), refd to. [para. 200].

Walpole (Lord) v. Orford (Lord) (1797), 30 E.R. 1076 (L.C.), refd to. [para. 200].

Cleaver, Re, [1981] 2 All E.R. 1018 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 200].

Sodeman v. R. (1936), 55 C.L.R. 192 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 200].

Brynelsen Estate v. Verdeck et al. (2002), 165 B.C.A.C. 279; 270 W.A.C. 279 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 201].

Pratt v. Johnson, [1959] S.C.R. 102, refd to. [para. 205].

Pratt v. Johnson, [1957] 21 W.W.R.(N.S.) 289 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 205].

Jones, Re, [1898] 1 Ch. 438, refd to. [para. 215].

Ottaway v. Norman, [1972] 1 Ch. 698, refd to. [para. 219].

Champoise v. Champoise-Prost Estate et al. (2000), 140 B.C.A.C. 112; 229 W.A.C. 112 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 224].

Snowden, Re, [1979] 2 All E.R. 172 (Ch. D.), refd to. [para. 224].

Glasspool v. Glasspool Estate et al., [1998] B.C.T.C. Uned. 383 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 224].

Glasspool v. Everett et al., [1999] B.C.A.C. Uned. 20 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 224].

Walder v. McDermott, [1931] S.C.R. 94, refd to. [para. 254].

Tataryn et al. v. Tataryn Estate, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 807; 169 N.R. 60; 46 B.C.A.C. 255; 75 W.A.C. 255; [1994] 7 W.W.R. 609; 116 D.L.R.(4th) 193; 93 B.C.L.R.(2d) 145, refd to. [para. 255].

Gray v. Gray Estate et al. (2002), 163 B.C.A.C. 282; 267 W.A.C. 282 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 255].

Gray v. Nantel et al. - see Gray v. Gray Estate et al.

Counsel:

R.T. Todd, for the plaintiff;

J.P. Hamilton, for the defendants, Beverly Porter and Paula Porter aka Paula Church;

L.C. Waterman, for the defendant, Theophil Rene Nuytten.

This action was heard on November 5-12, 2001, before Hood, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on June 11, 2002.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.