Sparks Estate, Re, (1993) 91 Man.R.(2d) 52 (QB)

• Judge: Clearwater, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: December 03, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1993), 91 Man.R.(2d) 52 (QB)

Sparks Estate, Re (1993), 91 Man.R.(2d) 52 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Beatrice Smith, as Administrator with the Will Annexed of the Estate of Charlotte Marie Sparks, deceased (applicant) v. Alma Wenham, Clara McKay, Alan Flynn, Margaret Lyall, Gladys Nicholls, Mona Garrioch, as administrator of the Estate of William James Sparks, Ray Moore, Audrey Doreen Edwards, Craig Sigurdson, Douglas Nicholls, Fred Hull, Donald Moore, Eleanor Kshywiecki, Lorraine Doiron, Roxanne Gerardy, Ken Booth Jr., The Public Trustee of Manitoba, as litigation guardian of Ryan Sigurdson, an infant, Debbie Kemp, Karen Dague, John Albert Tully and Janice Lynn Seddon (respondents)

(CI 93-03-009)

Indexed As: Sparks Estate, Re

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Portage La Prairie Centre

Clearwater, J.

December 3, 1993.

Summary:

A specific and residuary beneficiary pre­deceased the testatrix. The issue in this case was whether the bequests lapsed.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench determined that specific bequest lapsed and fell into the residue and the residuary bequest passed to the sole surviving residu­ary beneficiary.

Courts - Topic 17

Stare decisis - Authority of judicial deci­sions - Stare decisis - Scope of - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench stated that the principles of stare decisis and judicial comity prevented it from declining to follow prior decisions of its own court unless "(1) subsequent decisions have effected the validity of the impugned judgment; (2) it is shown that some bind­ing authority in case law or some relevant statute was not considered; (3) the judg­ment was an unconsidered one, given the circumstances where the exigencies of the trial required an immediate decision with­out opportunity to consult authority fully" - See paragraph 37.

Executors and Administrators - Topic 655

Appointment, qualification and tenure - Administrators - Removal - Conflict of interest - The executors named in a will predeceased the testatrix - One of the testatrix's nieces, who was a specific and residuary beneficiary, was appointed administratrix with Will Annexed - The administratrix applied for directions re­specting the administration of the estate, where another niece, also a specific and residuary beneficiary, predeceased the testator - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench declined to remove the administratrix although it was preferable that an administrator be a completely independent party - See paragraph 17.

Wills - Topic 4070

Failure of gifts - Lapse - Death of legatee - Specific bequests - A testatrix left a specific bequest of a quarter of her estate to two of her nieces share and share alike and, after various specific bequests, left equal shares of the remainder of her estate to the two nieces share and share alike - One of the nieces predeceased the testatrix - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench held that, pursuant to s. 25 of the Wills Act, the specific bequest lapsed and fell into the residue of the estate and the resid­uary bequest passed to the surviving niece.

Wills - Topic 4071

Failure of gifts - Lapse - Death of legatee - Residuary bequests - [See Wills - Topic 4070 ].

Wills - Topic 4071

Failure of gifts - Lapse - Death of legatee - Residuary bequests - Section 25 of the Wills Act provided that, unless a contrary intention appeared in the Will, a bequest that failed because the beneficiary prede­ceased the testator, fell into the residue of the estate - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench held that s. 25 applied to specific and residuary bequests - The court discussed the interpretation given the section in Manitoba cases and the different interpretation given similar sections by the courts in other provinces - The court preferred the Manitoba approach and, in the absence of special circumstances, was bound by the principles of stare decisis and judicial comity to follow prior deci­sions of its own court - See paragraphs 20 to 37.

Cases Noticed:

Lawson's Estate, Re (1981), 33 N.B.R.(2d) 462; 80 A.P.R. 462 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 24].

Peters Estate, Re (1967), 63 W.W.R.(N.S.) 180 (Man. Q.B.). refd to. [para. 24].

Stuart Estate, Re (1964), 47 W.W.R.(N.S.) 500 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 26].

Stechishin et al. v. Palmer et al. - see Pawlukevich (Paul) Estate v. Paw­lukevich (Peter) Estate et al.

Pawlukevich (Paul) Estate v. Pawlukevich (Peter) Estate et al., [1986] 3 W.W.R. 435; 41 Man.R.(2d) 62 (Q.B.), folld. [para. 27].

Cera Estate v. Wolfe et al. (1986), 46 Man.R.(2d) 117; 25 E.T.R. 68 (Q.B.), folld. [para. 28].

Cera, Re - see Cera Estate v. Wolfe et al.

Doplihar Estate v. Stopar et al. (1990), 75 O.R.(2d) 374; 39 E.T.R. 120 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 30].

Kossak Estate v. Kosak (1990), 37 E.T.R. 235 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 31].

Dacko et al. v. Kosak et al. - See Kossak Estate v. Kosak.

Harrison, Re (1885), 30 Ch. D. (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

Doucette v. Fedoruk Estate, [1993] 3 W.W.R. 232; 83 Man.R.(2d) 179; 49 E.T.R. 199 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Hansard Spruce Mills Ltd., Re (1954), 13 W.W.R.(N.S.) 285 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 37].

Oldfield Estate (No. 2), Re, [1949] 1 W.W.R. 540 (Man. K.B.), refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Guay (1980), 10 Man.R.(2d) 322 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Sarkin v. Sarkin et al. (1989), 36 E.T.R. 139 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Sarkin et al. v. Tupper et al. - see Sarkin v. Sarkin Estate.

McNeill's Estate, Re; Chancey v. Chancey, et al. (1980), 25 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 297; 74 A.P.R. 297; 6 E.T.R. 165 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Currie Estates, Re (1963), 44 W.W.R.(N.S.) 535 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [Schedule B).

Wudel, Re; Moore et al. v. Moore et al. (1982), 13 E.T.R. 25 (Alta. Q.B.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Moore et al. v. Moore et al. - see Wudel, Re.

Strittmatter v. Stephens (1983), 13 E.T.R. 127 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Shapiro, Re (1979), 107 D.L.R.(3d) 133 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [Schedule B].

McIntyre Estate, Re, [1950] 2 W.W.R. 682 (Man. K.B.), refd to. [Schedule B].

McDermot v. Owens Estate (1981), 25 Man.R.(2d) 24 (Co. Ct.), refd to. [Sched­ule B].

Haidl et al. v. Sacher et al., [1980] 1 W.W.R. 293; 2 Sask.R. 93 (C.A.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Whitrick, Re; Sutcliffe v. Sutcliffe et al., [1957] 1 W.L.R. 884 (Eng. C.A.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Kilby v. Myers, [1965] S.C.R. 24, refd to. [Schedule B].

Perry v. Woods (1796), 3 Ves. 206, refd to. [Schedule B].

Heathe v. Heathe (Case 114)(1740), 2 A.T.K. 121, refd to. [Schedule B].

Shaw v. Ford (1877), 7 Ch. D. 669, refd to. [Schedule B].

Birkett, Re; Holland v. Duncan et al., [1951] All E.R. 316 (Ch. D.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Canada Permanent Trust Co. v. Shave et al. (1958), 25 W.W.R.(N.S.) 638 (Sask. Q.B), refd to. [Schedule B].

Sugden v. Lord St. Leonards, [1876] 1 P.D. 154 (Eng. C.A.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Feltner v. Nova Scotia (1972), 7 N.S.R.(2d) 549; 27 D.L.R.(3d) 630 (T.D.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Marks v. Marks (1908), 40 S.C.R. 210, refd to. [Schedule B].

Shaw v. Shaw (1990), 67 Man.R.(2d) 264 (Fam. Div.), refd to. [Schedule B].

Statutes Noticed:

Court of Queen's Bench Surrogate Practice Act, R.S.M. 1987, c. C-290; C.C.S.M., c. C-290, sect. 40 [para. 1].

Intestate Suc­cession Act, S.M. 1989-90 c. 43; C.C.S.M., c. I-85 [para. 4].

Rules of Court (Man.), Queen's Bench Rules, rule 5.03, rule 5.04, rule 13.01 [para. 3]; rule 14.05(2), rule 75 [para. 1].

Wills Act, R.S.M. 1988, c. W-150; C.C.S.M., c. W-150, sect. 25 [para. 12].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Bailey, S.J., The Law of Wills (5th Ed.), pp. 193 to 198 [Schedule B].

Canadian Encyclopedic Digest (West.)(3rd Ed.), vol. 39, pp. 39-317 [para. 37]; 39-316 to 39-320 [Schedule B].

Feeney, Thomas G., The Canadian Law of Wills (3rd Ed), vol. 2, pp. 52 to 56; 60 to 62 [Schedule B]; 122, 123 [para. 24].

Harvey, Cameron, Annotation to Re Cera (1986), 25 E.T.R. 68, pp. 69 to 70 [para. 29].

Manitoba, Law Reform Commission, Report No. 67, Report on ss. 33 and 34 of The Wills Act (1986), c. 2 [para. 25].

Redden, Laurie S., Lapse of Testamentary Gifts of Residue (1992), 11 E.T.J. 244, pp. 244 to 249 [para. 26].

Sherrin, C.H., R.F.D. Barlow and R.A. Wallington, Williams' Law Relating to Wills (5th Ed. 1980), vol. 1, pp. 644 to 646 [para. 24].

Counsel:

Gordon T. Selinger, for Beatrice Smith in her capacity as Administratrix with Will Annexed of the Estate of Charlotte Marie Sparks, deceased;

Kris Janovcik, for Beatrice Smith in her personal capacity as a beneficiary;

W.R. Van Walleghem, for the respondents Clara McKay and the Public Trustee of Manitoba as litigation guardian for the infant respondent Ryan Sigurdson;

George N. Bass, Q.C., for John Albert Tully and Janice Lynn Seddon (moving parties added as respondents);

Mike Wasylin, on a watching brief for the respondents Debbie Kemp, Karen Dague, Kenneth Booth Jr. and Roxanne Gerardy.

This application was heard before Clear­water, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Portage La Prairie Centre, who delivered the following judgment on De­cember 3, 1993.