Meyer v. Capital Trust Corp. Ltd.

Meyer v. Capital Trust Corp. Ltd.

Under the Ontario Dependants' Relief Act (R.S.O. 1937 c.214) the court must confine its inquiry to matters enumerated in s.7 and apply s.9 for disentitlement; extraneous considerations such as marital history or personal relations (absent s.9 disentitling facts) are irrelevant; having applied the statutory criteria and considered competing claims to disputed assets, the appropriate relief was periodic payments of $150 per month to the widow.

Citation
[1948] SCR 329
Parties
Appellant (widow): Esther Mina Meyer; Respondent (executor): Capital Trust Corporation Limited, Executors of the Estate of Charles Conrad Meyer; Respondent (beneficiary): Christina Brethour; Respondent (beneficiary): William Conrad Meyer; Respondent (beneficiary): Carl Robert Meyer; Respondent (beneficiary): Olga Clarey; Respondent (beneficiary): Gordon Clarey
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 April 1948
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Dependants' Relief Act — Wills/estates / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; order of Court of Appeal varied to provide periodic payments to the appellant and costs awarded to appellant out of the estate.
Legal Topics
Dependants' Relief, Statutory Interpretation, Allowance for Widow, Disentitlement Under S.9, Scope of Judicial Discretion
Source Language
English
Estates Wills Dependants' Relief Family Law Statutory Interpretation Allowance for Widow Disentitlement Under S.9 Scope of Judicial Discretion

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Esther Mina Meyer

Appellant (widow)

Capital Trust Corporation Limited, Executors of the Estate of Charles Conrad Meyer

Respondent (executor)

Christina Brethour

Respondent (beneficiary)

William Conrad Meyer

Respondent (beneficiary)

Carl Robert Meyer

Respondent (beneficiary)

Olga Clarey

Respondent (beneficiary)

Gordon Clarey

Respondent (beneficiary)

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Dependants' Relief Act — Wills/estates / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope of matters to be considered under s.7 of the Dependants' Relief Act
  2. 2 Whether marital relations or conduct (outside s.9) are relevant to entitlement
  3. 3 Interpretation and application of s.9 disentitlement for wives

Ratio Decidendi

Under the Ontario Dependants' Relief Act (R.S.O. 1937 c.214) the court must confine its inquiry to matters enumerated in s.7 and apply s.9 for disentitlement; extraneous considerations such as marital history or personal relations (absent s.9 disentitling facts) are irrelevant; having applied the statutory criteria and considered competing claims to disputed assets, the appropriate relief was periodic payments of $150 per month to the widow.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; order of Court of Appeal varied to provide periodic payments to the appellant and costs awarded to appellant out of the estate.

Orders

  • Order varied to award the appellant monthly payments of $150 out of the estate.
  • The prior lump sum item of $5,000 previously directed by the Surrogate Court Judge was struck out.