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

The BC Court of Appeal affirmed the chambers judge's decision to allocate a sentimental ring to a third sibling, determining that their late mother was not competent to gift it.

In Rhodes v. Myers, 2024 BCCA 165, the court heard an appeal involving a dispute over the estate administration of the parties’ late mother. Two siblings, Patti Fern Rhodes and Donald Ray Myers, were named co-executors and trustees of their mother, Elizabeth Jane Myers' estate.

Initially, Patti filed a petition seeking to remove Donald as co-trustee and co-executor, requesting other remedies for estate administration. Donald agreed, provided that a ring made from a bolt by their deceased father, previously owned by their mother, be given to a third sibling, Allan, per their mother's wishes. Patti claimed their mother had gifted her the ring before her death.

The chambers judge ruled that their mother was not competent to gift the ring to Patti before her death due to dementia. Consequently, she ordered the ring be given to Allan and removed Donald as co-trustee. Each party was ordered to pay their legal costs. Patti appealed, arguing that the judge erred in addressing the ring's disposition without a formal application and that she incorrectly apportioned the costs.

Patti argued that the chambers judge made an "independent order" concerning the bolt ring, which was not directly requested in the initial petition, suggesting a procedural overreach. Historical legal precedents debated the appropriateness of handling such decisions within petition proceedings. However, the appeal court found that the existing petition, aiming to vest all Elizabeth Jane Myers' estate assets to Patti, indirectly implicated the bolt ring. Thus, resolving its status was crucial for defining the scope of the vesting order and ensuring clarity in the estate’s administration, aligning with the court’s goal to resolve estate disputes efficiently.

Moreover, the judicial deadlock regarding the bolt ring’s disposition necessitated intervention, as both trustees could not agree, potentially hindering the estate's execution. Here, the appeal court found that the chambers judge acted within her jurisdiction, aiming to fulfill the trust's terms and protect the beneficiaries' interests. Ultimately, the appeal court upheld the chambers judge's decision regarding the bolt ring but accepted fresh evidence concerning the costs, remitting this issue back to the chambers judge.