The adage timing is everything is a convenient phrase that is often used for emphasis in situations where it is not entirely true. In the case of determining entitlement to an inheritance though, it could very well be right on the money.
Back in 1991, Nora Mulligan provided in her Will both for her three (adult) children of her first marriage, and for her second husband Arthur. The children were bequeathed such “money” that she may own at her death, and her husband was to continue as surviving joint owner of the house and beneficiary of the residual estate assets.
In May 2005, Nora’s sister died without having made a Will. According to the rules of intestacy of the province where the sister resided, Nora and her one other sibling were the statutory beneficiaries under the intestacy. The Public Guardian’s office in that other province initiated proceedings to administer the estate, which consisted of “money” type assets, out of which Nora was to receive about $75,000.
In November 2005, the Public Guardian’s application was granted, and the sister’s estate was ready to be administered. Unfortunately, Nora had died some weeks earlier in October 2005 so she would not be able to enjoy that inheritance personally.
As the sole named executor under Nora’s Will, Arthur distributed all of her $115,000 “money” to her children; the $60,000 house passed to him by right of survivorship. Perhaps not surprisingly though, a dispute arose as to whether the $75,000 forthcoming from the sister’s estate was in turn to be characterized as “money” when received in Nora’s estate.
The matter progressed to court, and after a review of relevant case authorities the judge held that Nora had “no interest in the specific assets in her sister’s estate… [and] …those assets, accordingly, cannot be the subject of a specific bequest.”
For Nora’s children to have succeeded, Nora would have had to survive not only up to the grant of administration to the Public Guardian, but further to the point where her estate entitlement was properly distributed to her while living. Things may have been different if Nora’s sister had executed a Will that might have allowed for a quicker administration, or if Nora’s own Will had been drafted to cover such contingencies.
As it turned out for Arthur, timing really was everything, and he took that right to the bank.
CASE REFERENCE
Mulligan v Hughes 2007 SKQB 123 (CanLII)