Lamoureux v. Craig

Lamoureux v. Craig

Given the beneficiary's central role in preparing the will, the suspicious circumstances attending its execution (testatrix weakened and medicated, presence and conduct of witnesses, existence of earlier draft reflecting contrary intention, failure to call the drafting lawyer), the proponent failed to discharge the onus to show the instrument genuinely expressed the testatrix's last testamentary wishes and was freely and knowingly approved; therefore the will must be set aside.

Citation
(1914) 49 SCR 305
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Arzélie Lamoureux; Respondent/defendant: Isaie Craig
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 February 1914
Procedural Posture
Appeal (probate/will) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of Superior Court restored; impugned will declared null.
Legal Topics
Will Validity, Undue Influence/captation, Execution/formalities, Onus of Proof for Beneficiary Proponent, Testamentary Intention
Source Language
English
Estates Wills Succession Testamentary Capacity Evidence Will Validity Undue Influence/captation Execution/formalities +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arzélie Lamoureux

Appellant/plaintiff

Isaie Craig

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (probate/will) / Supreme Court of Canada on Appeal From Court of King's Bench, Province of Quebec

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will was duly executed according to prescribed formalities
  2. 2 Whether the testatrix had testamentary capacity at the time of execution
  3. 3 Whether undue influence/captation or deceit induced execution of the will

Ratio Decidendi

Given the beneficiary's central role in preparing the will, the suspicious circumstances attending its execution (testatrix weakened and medicated, presence and conduct of witnesses, existence of earlier draft reflecting contrary intention, failure to call the drafting lawyer), the proponent failed to discharge the onus to show the instrument genuinely expressed the testatrix's last testamentary wishes and was freely and knowingly approved; therefore the will must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of Superior Court restored; impugned will declared null.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs
  • Judgment of the Superior Court declaring the will null restored