David et al. v. Beals Estate, 2015 NSSC 288

• Judge: LeBlanc, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: October 22, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: 2015 NSSC 288;(2015), 366 N.S.R.(2d) 182 (SC)

David v. Beals Estate (2015), 366 N.S.R.(2d) 182 (SC);

    1154 A.P.R. 182

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.046

Julia Marie David, Shenner May Williams, Sydney Willis, Greta Beals, Leonard Dion Beals, Gwendolyn Beals, Garfield Beals Jr., Lavinia Thompson, Murphy Beals, Gerald Beals, Myles Nelson Beals, Cheryl Francis, Ranosker Beals, Phillip Fraser, Elma Fraser, Saunderson Fraser, Clay Fraser, Laverne Beals, Wade Beals, Derrek Beals, Wanda Beals, Denise Beals and Caunise Smith (applicants) v. Myles Dominic Beals in his capacity as Executor of the Estate of the Late Garfield Beals (respondent)

(Hfx. No. 433776; 2015 NSSC 288)

Indexed As: David et al. v. Beals Estate

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

LeBlanc, J.

October 22, 2015.

Summary:

Beals' will left his entire estate (a $46,000 home) to the grandson who lived with him until his death, caring for his home and his personal needs. A number of Beals' 10 surviving children applied under s. 3(1) of the Testator's Family Maintenance Act for dependants' relief.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the application.

Family Law - Topic 6611

Dependents' relief legislation - General principles - Moral obligation of testator - Effect of size of estate - Beals' will left his entire estate (a $46,000 home) to the grandson who lived with him until his death, caring for his home and his personal needs - A number of Beals' 10 surviving children applied under s. 3(1) of the Testator's Family Maintenance Act for dependants' relief - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the application where the children failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that Beals failed to provide for their proper maintenance and support - There was little to no evidence of the financial needs and circumstances of the children - It was insufficient for them to merely state that they were "of modest means" - Although the children had a moral claim, the grandson had a stronger moral claim based on his years of caring for Beals and his property - The estate size was small - Allowing the application would deprive the grandson of everything and provide little to the children - Beals chose the option of benefiting his grandson greatly rather than benefiting his children very little - Beals' clear testamentary intention to choose that option over others was appropriate given the limited estate value and the grandson's superior moral claim - The Act should not be used to interfere with that testamentary freedom - See paragraphs 45 to 97.

Family Law - Topic 6682

Dependents' relief legislation - Considerations in making awards - Moral duty of testator - [See Family Law - Topic 6611 ].

Cases Noticed:

McIntyre et al. v. McNeil Estate et al. (2010), 289 N.S.R.(2d) 372; 916 A.P.R. 372; 2010 NSSC 135, refd to. [para. 23].

Redmond v. Redmond Estate (1996), 155 N.S.R.(2d) 61; 457 A.P.R. 61 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 25].

Walker et al. v. Walker Estate (1998), 168 N.S.R.(2d) 231; 505 A.P.R. 231 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 25].

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, refd to. [para. 27].

Welsh et al. v. McKee-Daly et al. (2014), 350 N.S.R.(2d) 278; 1105 A.P.R. 278; 2014 NSSC 356, refd to. [para. 31].

Garrett v. Zwicker (1976), 15 N.S.R.(2d) 118; 14 A.P.R. 118 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Wilson v. Watson et al., [2006] B.C.T.C. 53; 2006 BCSC 53, refd to. [para. 49].

Buchman, Re (1975), 16 N.S.R.(2d) 262 (T.D.), dist. [para. 61].

Johnson v. Jefferson (2000), 185 N.S.R.(2d) 130; 575 A.P.R. 130 (C.A.), dist. [para. 61].

Rafuse Estate, Re (1990), 97 N.S.R.(2d) 46; 258 A.P.R. 46 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 64].

Hart v. Hart Estate (1993), 124 N.S.R.(2d) 333; 345 A.P.R. 333 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 66].

Kuhn v. Kuhn Estate (1992), 112 N.S.R.(2d) 38; 307 A.P.R. 38 (T.D.), dist. [para. 70].

R. v. Khelawon (R.) (2006), 355 N.R. 267; 220 O.A.C. 338; 2006 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 78].

Canadian National Railway Co. v. Halifax (Regional Municipality) (2012), 319 N.S.R.(2d) 319; 1010 A.P.R. 319; 2012 NSSC 300, refd to. [para. 78].

R. v. Khan, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 531; 113 N.R. 53; 41 O.A.C. 353, refd to. [para. 79].

R. v. Smith (A.L.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 915; 139 N.R. 323; 55 O.A.C. 321, refd to. [para. 79].

MacNeil v. MacNeil et al. (2014), 344 N.S.R.(2d) 350; 1089 A.P.R. 350; 2014 NSSC 171, refd to. [para. 82].

R. v. McDonald (D.) et al. (2013), 306 O.A.C. 250; 2013 ONCA 442, refd to. [para. 89].

Statutes Noticed:

Testator's Family Maintenance Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 465, sect. 3(1) [para. 21]; sect. 5(1) [para. 39].

Counsel:

Rebecca L. Hiltz LeBlanc, for the applicants;

Peter L. Coulthard, for the respondent.

This application was heard on May 11-12, 2015, at Halifax, N.S., before LeBlanc, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on October 22, 2015.