Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeBraidwood, Saunders and Levine, JJ.A.
CourtCourt of Appeal (British Columbia)
Citation2002 BCCA 160,(2002), 165 B.C.A.C. 115 (CA)
Date24 January 2002

Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate (2002), 165 B.C.A.C. 115 (CA);

    270 W.A.C. 115

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2002] B.C.A.C. TBEd. MR.058

Rose Erlichman (plaintiff/appellant) v. Harry Erlichman and Rose Erlichman, Executors of the Will of Abraham Erlichman, Deceased, Harry Erlichman, Dovid Erlichman, Joseph Erlichman, Sydney Erlichman, Yaakov Erlichman, Rachel Erlichman by her guardian ad litem Ruth Erlichman, Ariel Erlichman by his guardian ad litem Ruth Erlichman, Jonah Erlichman by his guardian ad litem Ruth Erlichman, Ruth Erlichman as the guardian ad litem of the unborn children of Sydney Erlichman (defendants/respondents)

(CA028074; 2002 BCCA 160)

Indexed As: Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Braidwood, Saunders and Levine, JJ.A.

March 6, 2002.

Summary:

A widow brought an action under the Wills Variation Act for a greater share of her late husband's estate. Alternatively, the claim was based on constructive trust and unjust enrichment.

The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2000] B.C.T.C. 938, dismissed the action. The widow appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal, Braidwood, J.A., dissenting, allowed the appeal.

Editor's Note: See also a related case at [2000] B.C.T.C. Uned. 60.

Family Law - Topic 6602

Dependents' relief legislation - General principles - Share or entitlement of wife - A testator's 1988 will divided his estate equally between his wife of then 43 years and his son - In 1998, less than three months before his death, the testator's new will left his wife only a life estate in half the estate's income - The wife, then 77, had little or no experience with large sums of money (although her general compe­tence was not challenged), and no capital assets - The estate had a gross value of $2 mil­lion, most­ly invested in term securities - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the trial judge, who upheld the will, gave insufficient weight to the testa­tor's legal and moral obligations to his wife - The court awarded her one-half the residue - See paragraphs 38 to 55.

Family Law - Topic 6610

Dependents' relief legislation - General principles - Moral obligation of testator - General - [See Family Law - Topic 6602 ].

Family Law - Topic 6666

Dependents' relief legislation - Entitlement - Existence of moral duty - [See Family Law - Topic 6602 ].

Family Law - Topic 6682

Dependents' relief legislation - Consider­ations in making awards - Moral duty of testator - [See Family Law - Topic 6602 ].

Family Law - Topic 6682.1

Dependents' relief legislation - Consider­ations in making awards - Legal obliga­tions of testator - [See Family Law - Topic 6602 ].

Cases Noticed:

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, consd. [para. 17].

Crerar v. Crerar Estate (1998), 111 B.C.A.C. 194; 181 W.A.C. 194; 61 B.C.L.R.(3d) 55 (C.A.), consd. [para. 17].

Glanville v. Glanville Estate (1998), 117 B.C.A.C. 80; 191 W.A.C. 80; 58 B.C.L.R.(3d) 240; 25 E.T.R.(2d) 258 (C.A.), consd. [para. 19].

Hoskins, Re (1961), 35 W.W.R.(N.S.) 430 (B.C.S.C.), consd. [para. 25].

Sawchuk v. MacKenzie Estate et al. (2000), 132 B.C.A.C. 171; 215 W.A.C. 171; 72 B.C.L.R.(3d) 333 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

Walker v. McDermott, [1930] S.C.R. 94, refd to. [para. 31].

Counsel:

J. Doulis, for the appellant;

J.G. Carphin, for the respondents.

This appeal was heard before Braidwood, Saunders and Levine, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, at Vancouver, British Columbia, on January 24, 2002. The decision of the court was delivered on March 6, 2002, when the following opinions were filed:

Braidwood, J.A., dissenting - see para­grap­hs 1 to 37;

Saunders, J.A. (Levine, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 38 to 55.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
12 practice notes
  • Saugestad v. Saugestad
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • December 13, 2006
    ...Glanville (1998), 58 B.C.L.R. (3d) 240, 168 D.L.R. (4th) 332 at paras. 14, 50; Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate (2002), 99 B.C.L.R. (3d) 26, 2002 BCCA 160 at paras. 17, 49; Bridger v. Bridger Estate (2006), 53 B.C.L.R. (4th) 235, 2006 BCCA 230 at para. 20;. Allchorne v. Allchorne Estate (2005)......
  • Gibbons v. Livingston
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 27, 2018
    ...provision for one’s spouse in Glanville v. Glanville (1998), [1999] 58 B.C.L.R. (3d) 240 (C.A.); Erlichman v. Erlichman (Estate), 2002 BCCA 160 [Erlichman]; and Bridger v. Bridger Estate, 2006 BCCA 230. As Saunders J.A. noted in Erlichman at para. 23, the first step in addressing that quest......
  • Steernberg v. Steernberg Estate et al.
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 10, 2006
    ...is consistent with the Court of Appeal's statements in Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate (2002), 211 D.L.R. (4th) 424, 99 B.C.L.R. (3d) 26, 2002 BCCA 160 and Wilcox v. Wilcox (2000), 190 D.L.R. (4th) 324, 79 B.C.L.R. (3d) 235, 2000 BCCA 491. [168] The defendants acknowledge that Erlichman and W......
  • Desbiens et al. v. Smith Estate
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 2, 2008
    ...half of it after the trial on the merits of the WVA action: Tataryn v. Tataryn , [1994] 2 S.C.R. 807, Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate , 2002 BCCA 160. [51] Angele had been put on notice at least since 1999 that there may have been children. There is some evidence that she was unhappy about th......
  • Get Started for Free
12 cases
  • Saugestad v. Saugestad
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • December 13, 2006
    ...Glanville (1998), 58 B.C.L.R. (3d) 240, 168 D.L.R. (4th) 332 at paras. 14, 50; Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate (2002), 99 B.C.L.R. (3d) 26, 2002 BCCA 160 at paras. 17, 49; Bridger v. Bridger Estate (2006), 53 B.C.L.R. (4th) 235, 2006 BCCA 230 at para. 20;. Allchorne v. Allchorne Estate (2005)......
  • Gibbons v. Livingston
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 27, 2018
    ...provision for one’s spouse in Glanville v. Glanville (1998), [1999] 58 B.C.L.R. (3d) 240 (C.A.); Erlichman v. Erlichman (Estate), 2002 BCCA 160 [Erlichman]; and Bridger v. Bridger Estate, 2006 BCCA 230. As Saunders J.A. noted in Erlichman at para. 23, the first step in addressing that quest......
  • Steernberg v. Steernberg Estate et al.
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • November 10, 2006
    ...is consistent with the Court of Appeal's statements in Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate (2002), 211 D.L.R. (4th) 424, 99 B.C.L.R. (3d) 26, 2002 BCCA 160 and Wilcox v. Wilcox (2000), 190 D.L.R. (4th) 324, 79 B.C.L.R. (3d) 235, 2000 BCCA 491. [168] The defendants acknowledge that Erlichman and W......
  • Desbiens et al. v. Smith Estate
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 2, 2008
    ...half of it after the trial on the merits of the WVA action: Tataryn v. Tataryn , [1994] 2 S.C.R. 807, Erlichman v. Erlichman Estate , 2002 BCCA 160. [51] Angele had been put on notice at least since 1999 that there may have been children. There is some evidence that she was unhappy about th......
  • Get Started for Free