Canada: Testamentary Freedom And Policy Constraints

It is a hallmark of common law jurisdictions that testators have freedom of testamentary disposition, subject only to three exceptions. In other words, an individual may dispose of his or her property as he or she wishes, even if the manner of disposition is whimsical.

Inadequate Provision for Dependants

Most jurisdictions have legislation that provide a remedy when a testator has not provided for dependants in an adequate fashion.   So, for example, if an individual disinherits a spouse or children whom he or she was obliged to support, that dependant may make an application to Court for an allowance to be made out of the estate.

Unworthy Heir

The second exception relates to the concept of an "unworthy heir".  Typically, the unworthy heir would be a beneficiary who had murdered a testator or a terrorist group who would benefit from the testator's assets contrary to the Criminal Code.

Conditions that Violate Public Policy

Courts have also intervened where a testator attaches conditions to a gift that are void as a matter of public policy.  These include:

  1. Conditions in restraint of marriage;
  2. Conditions that undermine the parent-child relationship by disinheriting the child who resides with a parent;
  3. Conditions that disinherit a beneficiary based on religious faith; and
  4. Conditions that require or encourage a beneficiary to commit a crime or perform an act prohibited by law.

A number of recent cases have cast doubt as to whether or not testamentary freedom has been further curtailed and the extent to which the public policy exception should extend.  However, the Ontario Court of Appeal has now clarified the position in Ontario.

Public Policy Decisions in Canada

The leading authority on the doctrine of public policy is Canada Trust Co. v. Ontario Human Rights Commission also known as Re Leonard.  In that case, the Ontario Court of Appeal considered that the terms of a Trust established by Reuben Wells Leonard was void by reason of public policy as declared in the Human Rights Code.  The trust required that the recipient of a scholarship must be white,Christian, of British nationality or parentage and that only 25% of the recipients of the scholarships could be women. It contained inflammatory language regarding racial superiority.

The Court of Appeal held that the trust was premised on notions of racism and religious superiority, which contravenes public policy. The Court upheld the scholarship trust but removed all restrictions with respect to race, colour, creed, religion, ethnic origin and sex.

Racial Discrimination – Spence v. BMO Trust Company

The concept of racial discrimination was also raised in Spence v. BMO Trust Company.   Verolin Spence and her minor son applied for a declaration that the Will of her late father, Rector Emmanuel Spence ("Eric"), was void, relying on Re Leonard.  Eric's Will left all his property to his other daughter Donna and her sons and stated:

I specifically bequeath nothing to my daughter [Verolin] as she has had no communication with me for several years and has shown no interest in me as her father. 

Verolin requested that the Court set aside Eric's Will.  If that occurred, Eric would have died intestate resulting in the two sisters sharing the estate equally.

Eric had lived in the UK but separated from Verolin and Donna's mother and immigrated to Canada in 1999. Both sisters remained in the UK, but Verolin immigrated to Canada to live with her father after completing school. Donna and Eric did not communicate after Eric immigrated to Canada. Verolin lived with Eric through her university education in Canada and he supported her when she returned to the UK to complete postgraduate work.

In September 2002, Verolin became pregnant. She told Eric that the father of her child was Caucasian. She claimed that Eric made it clear that he would not allow a white man's child in his house.  According to Verolin's affidavit, Eric would not return her calls and would have nothing to do with his grandson. A friend of Eric's second wife deposed that Eric had disinherited Verolin and her son because the father of her son was white. Neither Verolin nor the friend were cross-examined on their affidavits.

Verolin also relied on the case of McCorkill v. McCorkill Estate.  In that case, the Court struck down a transfer of the residue of the estate to National Alliance, a white supremacist organization. The Canadian branch of the organization had been dissolved as the purpose of the organization was to finance hate crimes, contrary to s. 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada  and human rights legislation. The bequest to National Alliance was found to be void, as the dissemination of hate propaganda by the proposed beneficiary violated public policy.

Justice Gilmore set aside Eric's Will on the basis that it offended public policy, as she found that the reason for disinheriting Verolin was based on a racist principle. Justice Gilmore acknowledged that the McCorkill decision had been criticized as, in the past, public policy considerations related only to a circumstance where the document itself contains impugned terms or where the trustee is required to do something that offends public policy or requires a beneficiary to perform an action that offends public policy.

In Spence, there was nothing on the face of the Will that impugned public policy.  Eric did not state that the reason for such disentitlement was because Verolin fathered a child with a white man and neither the Estate Trustee nor any beneficiary was required to act contrary to law.

Practitioners were also concerned by the fact that extrinsic evidence (the affidavits) was introduced in a proceeding where the Will was not being interpreted. Generally, evidence as to the testator's intention is only introduced where there is an ambiguity on the face of the Will. There was nothing on the face of Eric's Will that was ambiguous. The affidavits of Verolin and the friend were introduced to establish that Eric's motive for disinheriting Verolin was racist.

Justice Gilmore concluded that there could be no explanation for the sudden "cessation of communication with his daughter" and her subsequent disinheritance, other than the attitude of the deceased toward the father of his grandson.

The Spence decision was received with some degree of skepticism by practitioners and an appeal was anticipated. BMO Trust Company did appeal.

The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the application and determined that Eric's Will was valid.  In a solidly reasoned decision, Justice Cronk addressed the issues of whether the extrinsic evidence was admissible and if the application judge erred by improperly interfering with Eric's testamentary freedom.

Justice Cronk had no difficulty in finding that the affidavit evidence was not admissible, as it did not fall within the well-established exceptions relating to evidence of a testator's intentions. As a general rule, extrinsic evidence of a testator's intentions is not admissible when the testator's will is clear and unambiguous on its face.

Justice Cronk also noted that such evidence should relate to intent and not motive, dismissing the evidence as follows:

In this case, the Will expressly discloses Eric's motive, at clause 5(h).  That clause provides an explanation, from the testator himself, for his decision to exclude Verolin from the Will, namely, that "she has had no communication with me for several years and has shown no interest in me as her father".

Viewed in this fashion, the purpose of the extrinsic evidence was not to establish Eric's motive for the residual bequest in his Will but, rather, to contradict the lawful motive for the bequest disclosed by the plain language of the Will and to substitute, in its stead, a different and allegedly unlawful motive.  I see no basis at law for the admission of wholly contradictory, extrinsic evidence of motive for this purpose.  In my view, the courts should be loath to sanction such an indirect attack, which the deceased cannot challenge, on a testator's expressed motive and testamentary choices.

As to the public policy issues, Justice Cronk reviewed all the cases dealing with public policy and concluded that there were no conditions in Eric's Will that would engage the jurisdiction of the court:

The pivotal feature of these cases is that the conditions at issue required a beneficiary to act in a manner contrary to law or public policy in order to inherit under the Will, or obliged the executors or trustees of the Will to act in a manner contrary to law or public policy in order to implement the testator's intentions.

The Court noted that no such condition appeared in Mr. Spence's Will.  The residual beneficiaries were not required to act in a manner contrary to law or public policy to inherit.  Similarly, BMO Trust was not required to act in such a manner to implement his intentions.

Justice Cronk concluded:

Absent valid legislative provision to the contrary, the common law principle of testamentary freedom thus protects a testator's right to unconditionally dispose of her property and to choose her beneficiaries as she wishes, even on discriminatory grounds.  To conclude otherwise would undermine the vitality of testamentary freedom and run contrary to established judicial restraint in setting aside private testamentary gifts on public policy grounds

Justice Lawers concurred but added that the respondents were requesting the Court to expand the public policy exception to testamentary freedom, "by subjecting Mr. Spence's will to the test of whether it is discriminatory in its motivation or intention.  He noted that although this case dealt expressly with racist motivations and intentions, "there is no logical reason to limit the... new exception to racial discrimination would increase uncertainty in estates law and open the litigation floodgates. The respondent's proposal would greatly extend both the court's jurisdiction and its burden, and would disrupt estates law, which now functions smoothly to pass property from one generation to the next."

He also noted that neither the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms  nor the Humans Rights Code has a basis in a Wills case; the Charter exists to control the activities of government and not the private conduct of individuals. Similarly, the Human Rights Code is limited to regulating the actions of individuals only if they are providing services goods, facilities or accommodation. He stated:

...individuals are otherwise free to hold and to act on their prejudices however un-savoury, so long as they do not breach the criminal law. The Code obliges them to act rightly only in the market, whatever their private thoughts might be. Putting it differently, it is not the Code's purpose to force people to think and act rightly everywhere and at all times.


Practitioners who are advising clients should demonstrate caution in drafting Wills. Often, a testator wishes to include a statement explaining the reason for excluding a potential beneficiary. Although the Ontario Court of Appeal has clarified that it will not interfere with the motivation for a testamentary disposition no matter how unsavory, it is never advisable to include details that would alert a beneficiary to a possible Will challenge or that would form a basis for a challenge that the exclusion was made based on incorrect information.

A number of cases in other jurisdictions have relied on the first decision in Spence. Now that the Court of Appeal has reversed the application judge, it will be interesting to see if other jurisdictions follow suit.


1. This is in contrast to civil law jurisdictions where there is a system of forced heirship for a position of the estate.

2. In Ontario, Part V of the Succession Law Reform Act governs dependant's relief. However, in British Columbia, the legislation is much broader than other common law jurisdictions and permits a spouse or an adult independent child to make application to vary a will in circumstances where adequate provision has not been made and the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, SBC, 2009, C13.

3. A third category of "unworthy heir" seems to have emerged as a result of the decision of McCorkill v. McCorkill Estate, discussed infra.

4. 1990 CanLII 6849 (O.N.C.A.).

5. R.S.O. 1990, c. H. 19.

6. 2015 ONSC 615.

7. 2014 NBR 148 (NQB), affirmed 2015 NBCA.

8. RSC, 1985, c. C-46.

9. Spence v. BMO Trust Company, 2016 ONCA 196 (CanLII).

10. Ibid at para 109 and 110.

11. Ibid at para 56.

12. at para 75.

13. at para 119.

14. at para 122 and 123.

15. Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.Kp>

16. at para 126.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.