Equally Divided Will Found Unfair By B.C. Supreme Court

Unfair provisions in a will can be changed under the Wills, Estate and Succession Act (WESA) in British Columbia. However, the recent B.C Supreme Court case of Rawlins v. Rawlins (2023) demonstrated that even a will divided into equal shares can be unfair.

Varying a Will Under WESA

WESA defines a will writer’s duty to provide ‘adequate provision for the maintenance and support’ of their spouse and children. Importantly, this provision applies even to adult children of the testator. There are only narrow exceptions which allow will writers to disinherit their children, discussed in our article here. If a dependant was unfairly disinherited, or inherited an unfair amount, they can apply to vary the will. Interestingly, in the case of Rawlins, a completely equal division of estate assets was still found unfair. 

Facts of the Case

Marguerite Rawlins had three sons, and her husband had predeceased her. Her estate was valued at around $2.5 million in total, comprising of her house, investments and cash. Her will divided the total value of her estate into three equal shares to be divided between her sons. 

Her son Roy raised a claim under WESA, stating that this division of his mother’s estate was unjust. First, he claimed unjust enrichment against the estate and an enhanced moral claim to the estate’s assets. Roy believed the estate had been unjustly enriched due to his contributions to the maintenance of his mother’s home. Further, he believed he had an enhanced moral claim to the estate due to the significant care he provided his parents in their final years, which his brothers did not participate in. He further claimed that his parents had told him he would receive the home and specific investments upon their death.

His brothers disputed his claim that the division of assets was unfair, even in light of Roy’s contribution to his parents’ care. They said that, because Roy had been allowed to live rent-free with his parents for his entire adult life, his benefit from his parents throughout his life outweighs the benefit he gave to them through his care. 

The Court’s Decision

The judge considered the standard set in Tatyryn v Tatyryn, that the distribution of estate assets should be ‘adequate, just, and equitable’, and the Courts should only intervene where the distribution chosen by the will writer falls below that standard. Ultimately, the Court found that Roy failed to prove that the will did not make adequate provision for him. However, his claim of unjust enrichment was successful. Roy received a gift of $115,000 on top of his share of the estate. The remaining value of the estate was divided equally between the brothers. 

Those creating their estate plan should take notice of this case which demonstrates that even equal provision of estate assets can give rise to estate litigation and variation of their will. In order to reduce risk of costly estate litigation between beneficiaries after your death, it’s important to consult an experienced lawyer to create a comprehensive estate plan suited to your unique situation. Further, will writers should keep their beneficiaries up to date with their estate plans and avoid surprises.

If you have questions about creating an estate plan or updating an existing one, contact an experienced estate lawyer today. 

Have a question about this topic or a different legal topic? Contact us for a free consultation. Reach us via phone at 250-888-0002, or via email at info@leaguelaw.com.