Gillis Estate (Re)

Gillis Estate (Re)

Applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the personal representative neglected, wasted, acted dishonestly, concealed assets or was in an actionable conflict of interest; the evidence did not justify disturbing the testator's choice; therefore the court declined to exercise its discretion to remove Philip Walker as personal representative and dismissed the application.

Citation
2017 NSSC 6
Parties
Applicant/beneficiary: Kevin Gregory Gillis; Respondent/personal Representative: Philip Charles Walker; Proctor of the Estate: Erin O'Brien Edmonds, Q.C.
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Probate Act S.61(1) to Remove Personal Representative / Hearing and Decision (heard Dec 8, 2016; Decision Jan 10, 2017)
Outcome
Application dismissed; Philip Charles Walker remains personal representative of the Estate of Ethel Marie Gillis.
Legal Topics
Removal of Personal Representative, Fiduciary Duties of Executor, Inventory and Accounting, Estate Administration, Costs in Contested Matters
Source Language
English
Probate Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Removal of Personal Representative Fiduciary Duties of Executor Inventory and Accounting Estate Administration Costs in Contested Matters

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Gregory Gillis

Applicant/beneficiary

Philip Charles Walker

Respondent/personal Representative

Erin O'Brien Edmonds, Q.C.

Proctor of the Estate

Procedural Posture

Application Under the Probate Act S.61(1) to Remove Personal Representative / Hearing and Decision (heard Dec 8, 2016; Decision Jan 10, 2017)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Philip Walker should be removed as personal representative under s.61(1) of the Probate Act
  2. 2 If removed, who should be appointed personal representative
  3. 3 Allegations of concealment or theft of estate property

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the personal representative neglected, wasted, acted dishonestly, concealed assets or was in an actionable conflict of interest; the evidence did not justify disturbing the testator's choice; therefore the court declined to exercise its discretion to remove Philip Walker as personal representative and dismissed the application.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Philip Charles Walker remains personal representative of the Estate of Ethel Marie Gillis.

Orders

  • Application to remove Philip Walker dismissed
  • No alternate personal representative appointed