Ontario Superior Court rejects will challenge over claims of incapacity and undue influence

The will named a friend of 14 years as the primary estate trustee and to benefit from estate

Ontario Superior Court rejects will challenge over claims of incapacity and undue influence

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed an application challenging the validity of a November 2020 will, citing insufficient evidence for claims of lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and suspicious circumstances.

In Graham v. McNally Estate and Blais, 2024 ONSC 4006, the deceased passed away in October 2021, leaving a will that named a friend of 14 years as the primary estate trustee and beneficiary, along with the friend's spouse. The applicant, a sibling of the deceased, was not named as a beneficiary.

The applicant, who had not seen the deceased since 2011 but maintained weekly phone contact until February 2019, alleged that the deceased lacked testamentary capacity due to mental illness and confusion. They also claimed the friend unduly influenced the deceased and pointed to suspicious circumstances surrounding the will's execution.

The Superior Court reviewed the evidence presented by both parties. The applicant’s evidence primarily consisted of suspicions and speculations without substantive support. Claims of the deceased's confusion and mental illness were unsubstantiated by concrete evidence or medical records.

The applicant also argued that the friend unduly influenced the deceased by exploiting their devotion to a religious figure, claiming the friend misrepresented a connection to the figure. The court found no evidence supporting this assertion.

Additionally, the court found no suspicious circumstances surrounding the will’s execution. The deceased executed the will with legal assistance, and there was no indication of irregularities or a lack of understanding of the contents.

The court concluded that the applicant did not meet the minimal evidentiary threshold required to challenge the will. The court deemed suspicions alone insufficient to invalidate the will, and the objections were based on speculation rather than substantive evidence.

The court awarded the successful party reasonable costs of the motion and the application, both personally and in their capacity as estate trustee, which the applicant must pay.