A22 April 26, 2013 The Richmond News
I wish Horses could talk! by Jack Micner
What is always important to understand, in any property ownership situation (including a dispute of most any kind), is that despite the existence of a registered owner, on title, that is not absolutely conclusive evidence of full legal (and beneficial) ownership of the property. This issue arises fairly often in Estate situations, where the mix of documents that exist, and evidence of discussions among individuals, can lead to confusion, and ultimately a judicial consideration of the issues. Put another way, many people are “promised” assets by others while the “other” is alive. Documents made may or may not support the promise (and may not be brought to the attention of the person). After the “other” passes away, the surviving person is left to contemplate whether to try and enforce the promise. Earlier this month, reasons for judgment were released in the case called Sabey v. Beardsley and Estate of Hopffgarten and others. This is a dispute over ownership of a horse farm. Facts The Plaintiff first met the deceased and her husband, in Washington State, when he was a teenager. He saw them riding “dressage” and became immediately interested. He called them to ask for lessons and they agreed. From that, a very close, long term relationship evolved. The Plaintiff did a tremendous amount of work on the farm in Washington, and received lessons in return. This went for years. As the Plaintiff grew older, he chose to do missionary work in Asia, and left for two years. When he returned, he was permitted back on to the farm and continued his lessons and the farm work. He was not well compensated but was on occasion told of the couples’ long term plans, which appeared to be in part, that the farm would “one day be yours”. The Plaintiff was also encouraged by the couple to pursue post-secondary studies. The Plaintiff pursued Accounting at a Washington State college, and was able to arrange his classes so that he could maximize his time at the farm, and continue his work, and his riding (though it seemed a lot more work than riding). At a certain point, the couple made Codicils to their Wills, where they bequeathed their farm to the Plaintiff. However, the Codicils were not witnessed by two persons, and so were invalid. The Plaintiff over time, believed that the farm would be left to him and when the husband died, in 2006, the Plaintiff had a few discussions with the surviving wife and that belief was reinforced. When the wife passed, in 2011, her Will said in part that the farm was bequeathed to another person. I am sure that the Plaintiff was quite shocked when he discovered this. Court’s decision The case, legally speaking, was about something called proprietary estoppel. What that means, essentially, is that if a promise is made to someone, and they rely on it, documents made at a certain point in time won’t override the promise. What was most interesting was that the Plaintiff was a model witness. His credibility was not in doubt, and his evidence was thorough. Indeed, the Plaintiff is now well into his adult life (he is in his mid thirties) and so had a twenty plus year history with the (now deceased) couple. He clearly organized his life over many years to permit him to work, largely unpaid, at the farm. Other people who worked on the farm provided the Court with good, corroborative evidence about the Plaintiff as well (I’m sure that if the dressage horses the Plaintiff rode could have spoken, they would have given good evidence too!). The Court seemed to have a relatively easy task of concluding that the promise to the Plaintiff was made (more than once), the Plaintiff acted on it (over years) and did suffer detriment (a significant amount of work, though not from a negative perspective because he had a very strong relationship with the couple). Thus the case for the estoppel was made, and the Plaintiff was awarded the ownership of the farm. I think it was the proper result. Summary This is an important case, because this sort of thing happens often in our society, and I question how many people are aware of the remedy that exists. Not that it is always a simple remedy to pursue, but it is worthy of consideration, especially where a person’s life is so affected over years as was the case with the Plaintiff in this case. Understand that regardless what a title might show as the name of the registered owner(s), the true owner or person entitled may be different. There’s always a story!
Visit our website (www.WillPowerLaw.com) or call us at (604) 233-7001 to discuss your Wills, Estates and Seniors’ questions.
SPRY HAWKINS MICNER LAWYER
Jack
Micner
Suite 440-5900 No. 3 Road (Vancity Tower) Email: jack@willpowerlaw.com Blog: willpowerlaw.wordpress.com Twitter: @WillPowerLaw
=(>> ;>L?& ") * L, :,$(+ $+ J(L:, ;>L8$;
sXvS wuqw sYp uq sW Y [ uq v sXvb dvuY Up[tYvp^ X v Y YX[ X wu Y q wp sY Xp ur^[pV Xv v sXv px ruq p S q Y^u[uX f wuYX[ Xupq [ \Wu[ Jun 5 ........a i i ^r ......L[ ...................261453
=(>> )"J8:@ $(L,&:$ M+(9&;+) =+( &>,:+(&
XXuqw [pWq pq ^W su X[ qYuX q x[uwvX quqw q VpW[ dvuY pq vpW[ uq s YY ^[ Y qX Xupq xpsspU S v q Y pq j ruqWX WY q P q |uq [u X v Y Xv ^[ Xu s Yu px X[ qYuX xp[ w[ X [ x[ pr q Yp u s uqX [ Xupq dp^u Y uq sW i p [ uqw q [u uqw Xv WYh x [ pq Yh Xu t X V q uqw r vuq Yh etSd[ uq Y W[uXSh vpU Xp WY Xv d[ qY|uqt d[u^ ys qq [h q Xv [ Y^pqYu usuXu Y of bus drivers and other front-line customer service staff. f wuYX[ Xupq [ \Wu[ May 22 Wed... ji r i ^r L[ ...............261466
=(>>
<8+JL8 <(:88 * :,?:L
d t X[u^ [pWq Xv Up[s b MT^ [u q uxx [ qX WsXW[ Y UuXv rWYu uqq [ X[uVu X[ V s YXp[u Y q ^[u Y x[pr new country each session! May 23 Thu .... ni ki ^r ......L[ ...................276758
=/DI3EE ,>M
<>$ ") L,? <+
e^ ug ssS Yuwq Xp ur^[pV YX[ qwXv s q pp[ uq Xupq xWq Xupq s usuXS uq ^ q q q \W suXS px sux XvuY qX[S s V s T [ uY ^[pw[ r uY xp[ Y qup[Y UuXv s q q rp usuXS ur^ u[r qXY Uvp [ pXv [UuY Wq s Xp XX q prrWquXS Y T [ uY s YY y [Xu u^ qXY rWYX wp Xv[pWwv [ x [[ s ^[p YY P ss 604-238-8450 for more information.
7/IHFC M3..I3EE @./I/4E =(>> ;>L8$;K +)$:+,& =+( +8?>( L?"8$&
V SpW[ spp ^[ YYW[ v t S [ Xu[ VpsWqX [ qW[Y Y q Y t uqxp[r Xupq pq ^[pw[ rY Y [Vu Y q YW^^p[X V us s Xp Y qup[Y uq Xv prrWquXS psuYXu v sXv ^^puqXr qXY r qu W[ Y q ^ u W[ Y [ available for a minimum donation.
R^[ m ~Wq L[u i n i n^r ...............` m j j Y YY P ss m o k kom Xp ppt q ^^puqXr qX 279258 3rd Wednesday/month
7L($:L8 L($&
| S s t sX r YX [ XvuY ^[pw[ r uY Xv pqsS r [Xu s [XY ^[pw[ r xp[ XvpY nn S [Y N Yuwq UuXv Y x XS uq ruq Xv spU [ ur^ X rpV Y [ X t q x[pr } [ X d }Upq Np Rutu p q R[quY Rss gXq YY q usuXS s V sY welcome.
{ S n.....a ji i r ..................................... L[
=(>>
;>L(:,< @8:,:@
P ss m o k kon Xp r t q ^^puqXr qX Xp v V v [uqw X YX
3rd Thursday/month R^[ k ~Wq j .. { a oi ni ^r..........`jl mn Y YY { S m.....Th.. i r i ^r ............................. L[ 254356
&:$ L,? J> =:$
cYuqw Yur^s T [ uY Y XvuY Yu gXq YY s YY v s^Y ps [ ^vSYu ssS suruX WsXY Xp XX [ r q w v[pqu pq uXupqY q v[pqu ^ uq S qv q uqw Xv usuXS Xp xWq Xupq uq usS sux d[ qY^p[X Xupq V us s xp[ q additional $30 fee. R^[ m ~Wq k dW io io ^r.................`o Y YY 254357
Angels There For You is giving away $5.00 for the Senior Link Sponsored by:
Saturday, May 25th., 2013 A 2:00-4:00pm Richmond Alliance Church 11371 No. 3 Rd. Richmond
Come and Enjoy Live Performance! Featuring Folkloric Mexican Dancing
Call us for more information:
604.562.4427
One Coupon per Senior No Coupon, No Discount