The forensic audit found no evidence of misconduct or obstruction by the executor
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court of British Columbia rejected an application to remove an estate executor despite concerns over delays and administration issues.
Roy Harvey is the executor of his late brother, Garry Harvey’s estate. The deceased's stepdaughter, Tyna Wornell, filed an application to remove Roy as executor and sought to appoint herself as the estate's administrator.
The estate in question is governed by a will made in August 2020, shortly before Garry Harvey passed away in November of the same year. The will named Roy the sole executor and trustee, with the majority of the estate to be held in trust for Wornell and her son, known as the “Tyna Trust.” However, Wornell contested Roy’s management of the estate, citing delays, lack of transparency, and accounting issues.
Wornell petitioned in August 2023 to collapse the Tyna Trust and have the remaining assets transferred to her. The estate consisted largely of investment accounts managed by Scotia Wealth, which Roy initially refused to turn over without an agreed-upon accounting of estate transactions. The disagreement between the parties led to legal proceedings, culminating in a court order mandating the dissolution of the trust and the transfer of funds to Wornell. However, due to procedural issues, Roy succeeded in setting the order aside.
The case was eventually resolved through a consent order, which stipulated the division of estate funds, including a portion allocated to Wornell’s son and the completion of a forensic audit to assess the estate’s financial dealings. Despite Wornell’s continued dissatisfaction with Harvey’s administration, the forensic audit found no evidence of misconduct or obstruction by the executor. The audit revealed that the main financial challenge involved tax issues, which Roy had effectively managed, resulting in tax refunds for the estate.
The Supreme Court found that while some of Wornell’s concerns were valid, they had largely been resolved or addressed through the forensic audit and prior court orders. As a result, the court ruled that Roy Harvey should remain in his role as executor, dismissing Wornell’s application for his removal.
In its decision, the court emphasized the executor's role in safeguarding the estate's assets and ensuring their proper distribution to beneficiaries. It concluded that, despite some delays and communication issues, Roy had acted in good faith and fulfilled his responsibilities as executor.
