He could not recall basic information or communicate effectively in the months before death
The Quebec Superior Court invalidated a 2021 will, citing the testator's cognitive incapacity, and reinstated a 2006 will.
In Arditi c. Arditi, 2024 QCCS 1987, the court invalidated the 2021 last will and testament of David Arditi following a dispute raised by two of his children from his first marriage, Jennifer and Ryan. The plaintiffs challenged the 2021 will because of David’s cognitive capacity and alleged undue influence by his second wife, Peggy.
David passed away at 72 and had five children from two marriages. His 2021 will named Peggy as the sole beneficiary and liquidator of his approximately $18 million estate, including properties and an investment portfolio. The plaintiffs argued that David lacked the cognitive capacity to execute the 2021 will, having been diagnosed with Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD), a condition known for causing rapid cognitive decline. Medical records from March to July 2021 indicated significant memory loss and disorientation.
David's 2006 will, contested in this case, provided for a spousal trust benefiting Peggy during her lifetime, with the estate eventually devolving to his five children equally.
The court found substantial evidence from David’s medical records and testimonies indicating his cognitive incapacity when signing the 2021 will. Medical documentation showed David's rapid mental decline, corroborated by testimonies describing his inability to recall basic information or communicate effectively in the months leading up to his death.
Peggy contended that David had lucid intervals and could make a will, but the court found this claim inconsistent with the overwhelming medical evidence and witness testimonies. Additionally, Peggy's assertion that she provided incorrect information to medical personnel to cover David’s true condition was deemed non-credible.
The Quebec Superior Court concluded that David lacked the mental capacity to understand and appreciate the nature of his testamentary dispositions. Therefore, the court annulled the 2021 will was annulled.
Although Jennifer and Ryan alleged that Peggy exerted undue influence over David, the court did not find sufficient evidence to support this claim. The ongoing family conflicts and Peggy's behaviour did not constitute undue influence. Similarly, the plaintiffs' request to declare Peggy unworthy of inheriting, based on allegations of maliciously severing family ties and concealing previous wills, was rejected due to insufficient evidence of bad faith or malicious intent.
The court also addressed claims for moral damages. Jennifer and Ryan each sought $100,000 in damages for emotional distress and legal fees incurred due to the litigation. The court awarded a total of $40,000 in moral damages to the plaintiffs, to be paid jointly by Peggy and the notary, who was found to have failed in her professional duty by not properly assessing David’s capacity to sign the will and not adhering to the statutory requirements for notarized wills.
