The way in which legal research is conducted has evolved significantly in the past few decades with the advent of vast online directories such as Westlaw, LexisNexis, and CanLII. However, the process remains time-consuming, costly, and demanding, given the increasing complexity of the law and volume of information that must be gathered and synthesized. To address these challenges, new legal software products have been developed which apply artificial intelligence and machine learning to the process of legal research.
This blog will examine one of the most common mistakes made by people using DIY homemade wills - asking a beneficiary to witness the execution of the will.
Disinherited spouses & minor children (Dependants), with few resources, risk having their legitimate claims for support thwarted because they cannot afford to wait for their money. This video discusses how Ontario law allows Dependents to seek interim support to hold them over until their claims are adjudicated and to provide the wherewithal to prosecute their claims.
In this video, two senior lawyers address a colleague's innovative approach on how to defend a claim for support by a child who mistreated their parent.
Ontario’s courts and legislature offer an avenue for dependants to challenge how the estate of the deceased is distributed. While a testator generally has the right to dictate what happens to his/her assets upon death, certain relationships create responsibilities that limit this testamentary freedom, and a court might order that the estate pay the dependant support from the estate, over and above what the testator had intended. But what happens if the dependant mistreated the testator or, in the most egregious cases, caused the testator’s death?
In this video, lawyers discuss the factors judges consider when children seek court orders to compel a parent to have their capacity assessed. This issue arose in Abrams v Abrams and the lawyers talk about how the court dealt with the issue and what people need to consider when pursuing this type of litigation.
An individual who is determined to be incapable of managing their affairs may require a guardian to oversee and assist them. The Substitute Decisions Act 1992, (the “SDA”) provides that “An order appointing a guardian of property for a person shall include a finding that the person is incapable of managing property and that, as a result, it is necessary for decisions to be made on his or her behalf by a person who is authorized to do so.” But what happens if that individual refuses to have a capacity assessment to determine if they are in fact incapable?
As litigators who often prosecute claims against lawyers accused of negligence, we have observed first-hand the types of mistakes that are often made by lawyers. These mistakes generally stem from a failure to stay informed about the relevant law and/or to adopt and follow best practices when carrying out their duties. Increasingly, we anticipate that best practices will include utilisation of technical innovations. In this blog, we explore some of the ways in which such innovations may assist lawyers in avoiding malpractice errors and thereby reduce negligence claims.
In this very short video lawyers discuss the executor’s duty to account and a seminal case where a judge refused to award any compensation and drew an adverse inference because the executor failed to provide an honest accounting.
Plene administravit which is Latin for “fully administered” is a doctrine and defence that is available to an estate trustee when a creditor brings a claim against the estate, but there are no, or insufficient assets in the estate to satisfy any judgment and costs.
In this blog, I discuss the framework for Motions for interim Dependant support and compare and contrast two Court decisions to assist the reader to better understand under which circumstances a Court might be more likely to grant interim Dependant support.
Evaluating whether a limitation period may apply to prevent a party from pursuing their claim involves a two-stage analysis. First, the court must determine when a claim was “discovered”. Second the court will determine whether the applicant/plaintiff commenced a “proceeding” within the required time period.