Ontario Superior Court rejects additional funds claim from common-law spouse's estate

She claimed a secret trust existed between her partner and one of the estate trustees

Ontario Superior Court rejects additional funds claim from common-law spouse's estate

The Ontario Superior Court dismissed an applicant’s request for additional funds from the respondent's estate, the estate of her late common-law partner.

In Germana v Fennema Estate, 2024 ONSC 2011, the court found that the estate had fulfilled obligations to the applicant, Estelle Germania, under her common-law partner Mike Fennema’s will and their cohabitation agreement. Germania had received $1 million from Fennema's estate—$750,000 as designated in his will and $250,000 under the cohabitation agreement. Despite this, she sought an extra $1 million, claiming a secret trust existed between Fennema and one of the estate trustees. The court rejected this claim.

The dispute focused on two primary issues. Firstly, Germania claimed the estate trustees held $1 million in trust for her based on an alleged secret trust. Secondly, she argued that Fennema’s will had not made adequate provisions for her support, entitling her to additional support under the Succession Law Reform Act.

The Superior Court examined the couple’s financial arrangements and history during the trial. Shortly after they began cohabiting, Germania and Fennema signed a cohabitation agreement that asserted their financial independence and included a mutual waiver of claims against each other’s estates. The agreement stipulated payments to Germania upon Fennema's death, which were honoured, except a pending $50,000 related to moving expenses, which the estate acknowledged and agreed to pay.

Regarding the secret trust, the court found no evidence that Fennema intended to establish such an arrangement in his communications before his death. The court also confirmed that the estate trustees acted according to the terms of the will and the cohabitation agreement.

In assessing the claim for additional support, the court ruled that Fennema had made adequate provisions for Germania’s support, considering her assets, pension income, and the terms of the cohabitation agreement, alongside the payments she had already received.

Ultimately, the court denied Germania's request for additional support and granted the estate trustees their costs pending any resolution between the parties regarding this matter.

Recent articles & video

Fifth annual Canadian Law Awards honours groundbreaking litigation and innovative firm initiatives

Roundup of law firm hires, promotions, departures: May 13, 2024 update

Blaney McMurtry appears in four commercial list suits this past week

Federal Court of Appeal sets hearings for patent, copyright, employment cases

A huge thank you to our Advisory Panel for dedicating time to judge the 2024 Canadian Law Awards

Federation of Law Societies raises concerns over BC’s Legal Professions Act

Most Read Articles

BC Court of Appeal rules deceased mother was incompetent to gift sentimental ring

Ontario Superior Court emphasizes estate trustee must account for trust property

BC Supreme Court rules for equal asset division in Port Alberni property dispute

2024 Canadian Law Awards winners announced