Jung v. Lee Estate, 2005 BCSC 1537

JudgeBurnyeat, J.
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
Case DateSeptember 26, 2005
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations2005 BCSC 1537;[2005] B.C.T.C. 1537 (SC)

Jung v. Lee Estate, [2005] B.C.T.C. 1537 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2005] B.C.T.C. TBEd. NO.068

Estelle Lee Jung (plaintiff) v. HSBC Trust Company (Canada) Administrator of the Estate of Horace Lee, also known as Horace Ping Tung Lee and Ping Tung Lee and others (defendants)

(S030897)

Estelle Lee Jung, Judy Mar Hadeen, in her capacity as Executrix of the Last Will and Testament of Elsie Mar, and Joanne Leo Naganawa, in her capacity as Executrix of the Last Will and Testament of Effie Leo (plaintiffs) v. HSBC Trust Company (Canada), in its capacity as Administrator of the Estate of Horace Lee, also known as Horace Ping Tung Lee and Ping Tung Lee, Joyce Mar, Carole Rantfors and Donal Mar, in their capacity as Co-Executors of the Will of Edythe Mar, Victor Lee, in his capacity as Executor of the Will of Harold Lee, and Patsy Lee, in her capacity as Executrix of the Will of Henry Lee (defendants) and Estelle Lee Jung (third party)

(S050247; 2005 BCSC 1537)

Indexed As: Jung v. Lee Estate et al.

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Burnyeat, J.

November 2, 2005.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 2150

Actions in contract - Actions by or against estates - General - See paragraphs 40 to 43.

Limitation of Actions - Topic 9324

Postponement or suspension of statute - Fraud - Fraudulent or wilful concealment - See paragraphs 42 to 43.

Wills - Topic 1534

Preparation and execution - Signature - Place of signature - See paragraphs 44 to 50

Wills - Topic 1744

Preparation and execution - Alterations and deletions - Validity of - See paragraphs 51 to 60.

Wills - Topic 2338

Revocation - By act of testator - Conditional revocation (dependent relative revocation) - See paragraphs 61 to 68.

Wills - Topic 2371

Revocation - By subsequent will - General - See paragraphs 61 to 68.

Cases Noticed:

Laxer, Re (1963), 37 D.L.R.(2d) 192 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 46].

Beniston v. Shepherd, [1996] B.C.T.C. Uned. I40 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 46].

Cook v. Nova Scotia (1982), 53 N.S.R.(2d) 87; 109 A.P.R. 87 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 46].

Clarke Estate, Re (1992), 98 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 281; 311 A.P.R. 281; 27 E.T.R.(2d) 215 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 53].

McCarthy et al. v. Fawcett et al., [1945] 1 D.L.R. 545 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 61].

Brown Estate, Re, [1942] 2 All E.R. 176, consd. [para. 63].

Hennessey's Will, Re; Canada Permanent Trust Co. v. Holloway et al. (1984), 46 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 91; 135 A.P.R. 91 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 65].

Keating Estate, Re (1981), 46 N.S.R.(2d) 550; 89 A.P.R. 550 (Prob. Ct.), refd to. [para. 65].

Dwyer v. Irish et al. (1985), 54 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 105; 160 A.P.R. 105; 23 E.T.R. 1 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 65].

Lefebvre v. Major, [1930] 2 D.L.R. 532 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 65].

Pigeon Estate v. Major - see Lefebvre v. Major.

Teale, Re (1923), 54 O.L.R. 130 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 65].

Downey Estate v. Foster, [1991] O.J. No. 3475 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 65].

Sheen v. Sheen, [2005] 6 W.W.R. 627; 190 Man.R.(2d) 51; 335 W.A.C. 51 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65].

Valantine v. Whitehead, [1990] B.C.T.C. Uned. 378; 37 E.T.R. 353 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 65].

Tuckett, Re (1907), 9 O.W.R. 979 (Surr. Ct.), refd to. [para. 65].

Sorensen Estate v. Hawley (1981), 10 E.T.R. 282 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 65].

Service, Re, [1964] 1 O.R. 197 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [para. 65].

Anderson, Re, [1933] 1 D.L.R. 581 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 65].

Counsel:

R.D. Lee, for the plaintiff, Estelle Lee Jung;

E.J. Milton and K. Kuntz, for HSBC Trust Co. (Canada), in its capacity as Administrator of the Estate of Horace Lee, also known as Horace Ping Tung Lee, and Ping Tung Lee;

J.L. Leathley, Q.C., for Joyce Mar and Carolyn Rantfors, in their capacity as co-executors of the Will of Edith Mar.

This case was heard on August 22-24 and September 26, 2005, before Burnyeat, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on November 2, 2005.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • 2023 BCSC 952,
    • Canada
    • January 1, 2023
    ...six-year limitation period did not run until the requested documents were produced (at paras.14–17). In Re Estate of Horace Lee, 2005 BCSC 1537, rev'd on other grounds 2006 BCCA 549, at paras. 42–43, the context of estate litigation where the beneficiaries were unaware of......
  • Santos v Turgeon,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 5, 2023
    ...six-year limitation period did not run until the requested documents were produced (at paras.14–17). In Re Estate of Horace Lee, 2005 BCSC 1537, rev'd on other grounds 2006 BCCA 549, at paras. 42–43, the context of estate litigation where the beneficiaries were unaware of......
  • Jung v. Lee Estate et al., 2006 BCCA 549
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 6, 2006
    ...to prove the testator's 1985 will as his true will. The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2005] B.C.T.C. 1537; 2005 BCSC 1537, held that the handwritten portion of the 1985 will concerning bequests had been added after the will was signed by the testator and the wit......
  • Yen Estate v. Yen-Zimmerman et al., [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1620
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • October 31, 2012
    ...context of the other evidence and found that the will had been properly executed. [32] Six years later in Jung, Re Estate of Horace Lee , 2005 BCSC 1537, Burnyeat J. was faced with a somewhat different issue. He was asked to find that a will had been proven in solemn form. The witnesses to ......
4 cases
  • 2023 BCSC 952,
    • Canada
    • January 1, 2023
    ...six-year limitation period did not run until the requested documents were produced (at paras.14–17). In Re Estate of Horace Lee, 2005 BCSC 1537, rev'd on other grounds 2006 BCCA 549, at paras. 42–43, the context of estate litigation where the beneficiaries were unaware of......
  • Santos v Turgeon,
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • June 5, 2023
    ...six-year limitation period did not run until the requested documents were produced (at paras.14–17). In Re Estate of Horace Lee, 2005 BCSC 1537, rev'd on other grounds 2006 BCCA 549, at paras. 42–43, the context of estate litigation where the beneficiaries were unaware of......
  • Jung v. Lee Estate et al., 2006 BCCA 549
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 6, 2006
    ...to prove the testator's 1985 will as his true will. The British Columbia Supreme Court, in a decision reported at [2005] B.C.T.C. 1537; 2005 BCSC 1537, held that the handwritten portion of the 1985 will concerning bequests had been added after the will was signed by the testator and the wit......
  • Yen Estate v. Yen-Zimmerman et al., [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1620
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • October 31, 2012
    ...context of the other evidence and found that the will had been properly executed. [32] Six years later in Jung, Re Estate of Horace Lee , 2005 BCSC 1537, Burnyeat J. was faced with a somewhat different issue. He was asked to find that a will had been proven in solemn form. The witnesses to ......

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