BC Supreme Court revokes probate grant for failure to properly notify testator’s son in Mexico

The BC Supreme Court has revoked the grant of probate due to inadequate notice to one of the testator’s son, who was residing in Mexico and was unlikely to have seen mail sent to the family's address in Canada.

In Gill v Gill, 2024 BCSC 526, the court has revoked a grant of probate originally issued to Satdev Singh Gill, pertaining to the estate of the late Gurdarshan Singh Gill. This decision also dismissed an application to terminate wills variation claims brought by the testator’s wife, Amarjit Kaur Gill, and her children.

The core of the dispute arose after Gurdarshan Singh Gill passed away on July 16, 2013. His will, executed in 2008, named his son, Satdev, as the executor and sole beneficiary of his estate. This decision left other family members, including Gurdarshan's wife, Amarjit, and two other children, Lakhdev Singh Gill and Sarinder Kaur Gill, contesting the will under BC's Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA).

The plaintiffs argued that they did not receive proper notice of the probate application, which is a statutory requirement under WESA. The court's review found that indeed, adequate notice had not been given to Lakhdev, who resided in Mexico and was unlikely to see mail sent to the family's address in Canada.

The BC Supreme Court, addressing the procedural fairness of the case, emphasized that the purpose of the notice requirement is functional rather than perfunctory, intended to ensure that those affected by the estate proceedings are adequately informed and able to respond.

Moreover, the court addressed applications related to the wills variation claims, which argued that the will does not make adequate provision for the testator's spouse and children. Satdev sought to dismiss these claims as statute-barred and argued that Amarjit was estopped from claiming because she allegedly knew the will's contents and had signed a release. The court found that these issues, particularly concerning Amarjit’s understanding and agreement to the release, were too intertwined with factual disputes and matters of credibility to be decided summarily or without a full trial.

The court's decision to revoke the probate grant effectively resets the clock on the statutory period for filing wills variation claims, giving the plaintiffs a fresh opportunity to challenge the will.