Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
In that case the will should explicitly state who gets what and the reasoning behind it. There were no details in the article aside from the fact that the will hadn't been updated in over 2 decades, which could be reason enough to nullify it. But if you stated that kid 1 gets 100% of your estate and kid 2 gets nothing, stating that kid 1 help build your estate while kid 2 did nothing and deserves nothing, then I don't see how that could ever be overturned
|
The limits on testamentary freedom vary in each province. In Alberta it is more difficult than in BC to vary a will. Here you would have to establish inadequate maintence and support was provided, and only a spouse or child can make this claim.
If my client wants to treat children differently, I make copious notes, and recommend they leave a detailed memo with their will explaining their reasoning.
Now, there is nothing stopping the children from settling on their own distribution. The brothers in this case could have shared with their sisters if they were embarrassed by the unequal distribution.
https://www.cwilson.com/wills-variat...nadian-values/
https://www.lawnow.org/people-always...y-legislation/