Fraser v. Fraser et al., 2008 BCSC 1733

JurisdictionBritish Columbia
JudgeBruce, J.
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
Subject MatterGUARDIAN AND WARD,PERSONS OF UNSOUND MIND,EXECUTORS AND ADMINISTRATORS
Citation2008 BCSC 1733,[2008] B.C.T.C. Uned. F64
Date18 December 2008
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
7 practice notes
  • Palamarek, Re, 2011 BCSC 563
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • May 3, 2011
    ...is one referred to in section 19.2 (1) (b). [158] Section 8 has not been considered by this Court. However, in Fraser v. Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733, the Court considered the capacity of a patient to choose his committee under s. 9 of the Patients Property Act. This was a case where a father ele......
  • Cameron (Re), 2020 BCSC 157
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • February 10, 2020
    ...now, the capacity to make decisions about her care, and to nominate a committee. As Madam Justice Bruce observed in Fraser v Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733: [19] In this case the nomination is in writing and is signed by Andrew Fraser Sr. in the presence of two witnesses. Thus it meets the requirem......
  • Schultz (Re), 2020 BCSC 1718
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • September 30, 2020
    ...example, see Stewart (Re) at para. 47-48; Balducci at para. 49, 52; Cho (Re), 2020 BCSC 689 at para. 40; Fraser v. Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733 at para. 25; Palamarek (Re), 2011 BCSC 563 at [52]       Counsel for Mr. Boudreault objected to th......
  • Sangha, Re, 2013 BCSC 1965
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 17, 2013
    ...as to person or estate or both, a person may still have input into the applicable person to serve as committee. In Fraser v. Fraser , 2008 BCSC 1733, Madam Justice Bruce observed: [20] There is a qualitative difference between managing one's business affairs and attending to one's daily car......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Palamarek, Re, 2011 BCSC 563
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • May 3, 2011
    ...is one referred to in section 19.2 (1) (b). [158] Section 8 has not been considered by this Court. However, in Fraser v. Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733, the Court considered the capacity of a patient to choose his committee under s. 9 of the Patients Property Act. This was a case where a father ele......
  • Cameron (Re), 2020 BCSC 157
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • February 10, 2020
    ...now, the capacity to make decisions about her care, and to nominate a committee. As Madam Justice Bruce observed in Fraser v Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733: [19] In this case the nomination is in writing and is signed by Andrew Fraser Sr. in the presence of two witnesses. Thus it meets the requirem......
  • Schultz (Re),
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • September 30, 2020
    ...example, see Stewart (Re) at para. 47-48; Balducci at para. 49, 52; Cho (Re), 2020 BCSC 689 at para. 40; Fraser v. Fraser, 2008 BCSC 1733 at para. 25; Palamarek (Re), 2011 BCSC 563 at [52]       Counsel for Mr. Boudreault objected to th......
  • Sangha, Re, 2013 BCSC 1965
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 17, 2013
    ...as to person or estate or both, a person may still have input into the applicable person to serve as committee. In Fraser v. Fraser , 2008 BCSC 1733, Madam Justice Bruce observed: [20] There is a qualitative difference between managing one's business affairs and attending to one's daily car......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT