- with Senior Company Executives, HR and Inhouse Counsel
- with readers working within the Insurance, Healthcare and Oil & Gas industries
Estate disputes aren't just about money. They often involve deep emotions, family history, and unresolved conflict. But when accusations are made without solid proof, the consequences can be serious. The BC Supreme Court case Malacek v. Young (2021 BCSC 2219) is a powerful reminder of what can go wrong when claims are made recklessly.
What Happened
After Olaf Hall Leiren (“Olaf”) passed away, litigation ensued between his wife of 37 years, Carol Leiren (“Carol”), and his four daughters from a previous marriage. The daughters' claimed that Olaf and Carol had in fact separated before his death.
The daughters' sought leave pursuant to section 151 of BC's Wills, Estates and Succession Act (“WESA”), to file a family claim on behalf of Olaf's estate against Carol's Estate. Their goal was to divide Olaf's property under Part 5 of the Family Law Act (“FLA”), as if Olaf and Carol had been separated.
To support their case, the daughters alleged that Carol had started a romantic relationship with a friend. They painted a picture of a broken marriage and emotional distance while Olaf was in long-term care due to health issues.
What the Court Decided
Justice Giaschi rejected the daughters' petition and agreed that Olaf and Carol were still married at the time of Olaf's death. In fact, the judge said that the daughters had spent years trying to break up the marriage and that their claims were “insulting, scandalous and outrageous”.
The Cost of Making False Claims
The court didn't just reject the daughters' claim but ordered them to pay “special costs” which are extra penalties used when someone acts in a seriously inappropriate way during a lawsuit.
Justice Giaschi cited five key reasons for this decision:
- Offensive Claims: Claims of a romantic relationship between Carol and her friend were unfounded and deeply offensive.
- Threats and Intimidation: The daughters' conduct included threats and intimidation towards Carol and her friend.
- Attack on a Long-Term Marriage: Their challenge to a 37-year marriage lacked any credible evidence.
- Reckless Litigation: The daughters pursued a weak legal claim and kept going with the lawsuit even though they knew the estate had no money.
- Improper Motives: The daughters were trying to get a share of Carol's property by convincing Olaf to divorce her. Their lawsuit was just a continuation of this attempt.
What you Can Learn
Estate disputes can be emotionally charged and complex, especially when family relationships are involved. But as Malacek v. Young shows, making serious accusations without solid evidence can lead to lasting damage: financially, legally, and personally.
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.
