Courts may order a plaintiff to pay money into court in certain prescribed situations as security for the defendant’s anticipated costs of the litigation. This is available to a defendant in circumstances where there is a likelihood that a defendant will have difficulty recovering costs from a plaintiff at the end of the litigation if the plaintiff loses and is ordered to pay costs to the defendant.
The wild swings in cryptocurrencies have created ripple effects in the world’s economy. This new type of currency has grown in value and popularity, in part, by the increased adoption by retail and institutional investors alike. There is little doubt that litigation will follow. One recent case is Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v. Costodian Inc. et al. Justice Hainey’s decision is quite interesting, because it provides a concise summary of how the respondent cryptocurrency exchange functioned and how complicated the process really is.
Covid-19 has forced all of us and our institutions to adapt in unprecedented ways. The laws governing wills and estates are no exception. This blog explores some of the changes that Ontario has enacted, some temporary and others permanent, to allow for video conferencing during the execution of testamentary documents.
The courts have awarded attorneys a “special fee”, in addition to any compensation permitted under the power of attorney document or in the tariff, where extra or specialized work by the attorney was necessary in the administration of the grantor’s property or their personal care.
McQuoid v. Patterson is a very interesting case that raises a number of different issues. The late Arthur Marvin Patterson Junior (“Arthur”) died intestate. Had he made a Will, Arthur could have chosen an estate trustee whose responsibility it would be to gather in his assets, pay his liabilities, and distribute Arthur’s assets as provided for on his Will.
It was recently announced that Larry King, the famous talk show host known for interviewing movie stars, musicians, authors, and world leaders, has passed away at the age of 87. King’s show “Larry King Live” was CNN’s longest standing program of 25 years, with over one million viewers per episode.King amassed a significant fortune over the course of his illustrious career, and is estimated to have had a net worth of approximately $50 million USD at the time of his passing.In addition, King’s professional career was matched by what some may call an equally eventful personal life. He was married eight times, to seven different women, and had five children. As Larry King said himself “I’m not good at marriage, but I’m a great boyfriend.”As a result, there has been considerable interest regarding who may stand to inherit King’s sizeable estate.
In Elias Restaurant v. Keele Sheppard Plaza Inc., 2020 ONSC 5457, a Toronto landlord and property manager terminated a commercial lease and sought to evict the owners of a Caribbean restaurant from their shopping plaza. Although the jurisprudence is rife with these types of commercial tenancy disputes, this one is of particular note.
In the Harry Potter series, Professor Severus Snape appears to be one of Harry's nemeses, while it is later revealed that he was secretly one of Harry's staunchest allies and protectors. As the story progresses, Harry and his friends also learn that Snape was in fact a "half-blood", born with a Muggle (non-magic) father, while his mother was a witch.In the real world however, the concept of being a "half-blood" very much exists and can still play a significant role in an estate where the deceased dies without making a valid will, resulting in what is called an "intestacy".
The recent decision of C.M. Callow Inc. v. Zollinger, 2020 SCC 45, by the Supreme Court of Canada, has expanded the duty of good faith in the performance of contracts, by broadening the types of conduct that can lead to a finding of a breach of that duty.
There are times when one executor can be held liable for the misdeeds of another. In Cahill v. Cahill the Court dealt with this issue. This educational video highlights whether all estate trustees have a responsibility to fully participate in the administration of the trust and under what circumstances liability flows from delegation and failure to supervise their co-executor.