The company's actions in settling disputes and administering the estate were appropriate: court
The BC Supreme Court ruled in favour of a trust company, approving its accounts and remuneration for administering an estate while dismissing an application for additional document production.
The deceased left a will that appointed his sister as executor. The estate's primary asset was the equity in a property in Big Bar Lake, BC. The will divided the estate equally between the deceased’s son and daughter.
Due to disputes over the administration of the estate, both siblings filed petitions seeking to be appointed as the sole administrators. A judge ruled that neither sibling should be appointed due to the potential for conflict and instead appointed a neutral party, Heritage Trust Company, as the administrator.
Most Read
Heritage encountered several complications in administering the estate, including claims by the initial executor regarding a promissory note and ownership issues related to a company co-owned by the deceased and the initial executor. Despite the deceased's children receiving two valuable labrador retrievers from the company, disputes over their ownership and value persisted.
One of the beneficiaries frequently challenged Heritage's administration, alleging negligence and bias. However, the court found these claims to be unfounded. Heritage settled the initial executor's claims, including legal fees and compensation for anticipated funeral costs, which the challenging beneficiary contested.
The Supreme Court rejected the application to produce Heritage's and its lawyers' files, citing that it was unnecessary and would only increase costs. The court noted that Heritage had responded adequately to inquiries and that the persistent demands were baseless and prejudicial to the other beneficiary.
The court found that Heritage's actions in settling disputes and administering the estate were appropriate. It approved Heritage's fee, concluding that it was reasonable given the complexity of the administration.
Ultimately, the BC Supreme Court ruled in favour of Heritage, summarily passing its accounts and dismissing the application for additional document production. The court also awarded full indemnity costs to Heritage, payable from the estate, and to the supporting beneficiary, payable from the challenging beneficiary's share of the estate.
