Norman Estate v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada, (2014) 358 B.C.A.C. 190 (CA)

• Judge: Bauman, C.J.B.C., D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: June 18, 2014
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (2014), 358 B.C.A.C. 190 (CA);2014 BCCA 277

Norman Estate v. Watch Tower Bible (2014), 358 B.C.A.C. 190 (CA);

    614 W.A.C. 190

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] B.C.A.C. TBEd. JL.018

Dana Norman, Administrator for the Estate of Lloyd Eugene Norman, Deceased (appellant/plaintiff) v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada (respondent/defendant)

(CA041364; 2014 BCCA 277)

Indexed As: Norman Estate v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Bauman, C.J.B.C., D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A.

July 8, 2014.

Summary:

Under a "Conditional Donation Agreement" (Agreement) between Lloyd and Lily Norman and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada (Society), donations were made by the Normans to the Society. Dana Norman was the administrator for the estate of Lloyd Norman (Estate). She applied, after the Normans' death, to recover the $250,000 balance of the donations that the Normans had made to the Society under the Agreement.

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed the application. The court found that the Normans intended the Agreement to have immediate effect, and therefore the donations were not testamentary dispositions. The Agreement evidenced a gift with a condition subsequent that created an inter vivos trust. The Estate appealed. At issue was whether the Agreement was a testamentary disposition and therefore invalid because it failed to comply with the Wills Act in effect at the relevant times.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Gifts - Topic 501

Gifts inter vivos - General principles - Gifts inter vivos - Defined - See paragraphs 1 to 44.

Practice - Topic 8800

Appeals - General principles - Duty of appellate court regarding finding of fact - See paragraph 17.

Practice - Topic 8800.1

Appeals - General principles - Duty of appellate court regarding findings of mixed law and fact by a trial judge - See paragraphs 14 to 16.

Trusts - Topic 8

Definitions - Inter vivos trust v. testamentary trust - See paragraphs 1 to 44.

Trusts - Topic 342

Creation of trust - Requirements of - Alienation of property - See paragraphs 35 to 42.

Trusts - Topic 354

Creation of trust - Intention - Certainty of intention - See paragraphs 35 to 42.

Wills - Topic 4

Testamentary instruments - General principles - What constitutes a testamentary disposition - See paragraphs 1 to 43.

Cases Noticed:

Easingwood v. Cockroft - see Easingwood v. Easingwood Estate et al.

Easingwood v. Easingwood Estate et al. (2013), 337 B.C.A.C. 66; 576 W.A.C. 66; 2013 BCCA 182, refd to. [para. 14].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 14].

Lister v. Smith (1863), 164 E.R. 1282; 3 Sw. & Tr. 282, refd to. [para. 16].

Jones v. Lock (1865), L.R. 1 Ch. App. Cas. 25, refd to. [para. 17].

Mordo v. Nitting et al., [2006] B.C.T.C. Uned. C43; 2006 BCSC 1761, refd to. [para. 17].

Cock v. Cooke (1866), L.R. 1 P. & D. 241, refd to. [para. 18].

Wonnacott v. Loewen (1990), 44 B.C.L.R.(2d) 23 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Corlet v. Isle of Man Bank Ltd., [1937] 3 D.L.R. 163; [1937] 2 W.W.R. 209 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

MacInnes v. MacInnes, [1935] S.C.R. 200, dist. [para. 27].

Anderson Estate v. Polson, [2003] B.C.T.C. 1721; 2003 BCSC 1721, refd to. [para. 27].

Pfrimmer, Re, [1936] 2 D.L.R. 460 (Man. C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

Western Smallware & Stationery Co. v. Bell (1965), 53 D.L.R.(2d) 574 (Man. Q.B.), affd. (1965), 55 D.L.R.(2d) 193 (Man. C.A.), dist. [para. 29].

Copp v. Wood, [1926] 2 D.L.R. 224 (N.B.C.A.), dist. [para. 29].

Schmidt v. Air Products Canada Ltd. - see Stearns Catalytic Pension Plans, Re.

Stearns Catalytic Pension Plans, Re, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 611; 168 N.R. 81; 155 A.R. 81; 73 W.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 30].

Anderson (Costello) v. Patton, [1948] 2 D.L.R. 202; [1948] 1 W.W.R. 461 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

Lewis et al. v. Union of B.C. Performers et al., [1995] B.C.J. No. 986 (S.C.), affd. [1996] 6 W.W.R. 588; 70 B.C.A.C. 99; 115 W.A.C. 99; 18 B.C.L.R.(3d) 382 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Counsel:

D.A. Hunter and T.W.B. Cullen, for the appellant;

D.M. Gnam, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard at Vancouver, B.C., on June 18, 2014, by Bauman, C.J.B.C., D. Smith and MacKenzie, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. MacKenzie, J.A., delivered the following decision for the court on July 8, 2014.