Mar 31, 2026
When someone you know passes away, there is more to manage than just the impact of their loss. There is a legal process that determines how their finances are handled, debts are paid, and inheritances are distributed. It can feel overwhelming if you’re not familiar with the terminology or steps involved. This guide breaks down the fundamentals of estates in Ontario in way that is easy to understand.
What is an Estate?
An estate is everything a person owned (assets) and owed (liabilities) at the time of their death.
Example: Bob passes away. At the time of his death, he owned a house, a chequing account with $2,000, and a savings account with $40,000. He also owed $6,000 to CRA. All these together form Bob’s “Estate.”
What is an Executor?
An executor (aka an estate trustee) is an individual who manages someone’s estate after they die. There can be more than one estate trustee, and sometimes a trust company can act as the estate trustee instead of an individual. An executor is usually specified in a will or otherwise appointed by court order.
Example: Bob passed away leaving a valid will that that names George as the executor of his Estate. George will be responsible for accessing and closing Bob’s bank accounts, paying the debt to CRA and other liabilities, selling the house, and paying the remaining money to the beneficiaries named in the will, among other responsibilities.
What exactly is “Probate”?
Probate is the term for the process of obtaining a “Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee” also commonly referred to as a “probate certificate”.
Example: For Sally and Donna to receive their inheritance following Bob’s death, a process called “probate” must occur. This process usually begins when Sally and Donna give the original will to George. George must then apply for a “probate certificate” by submitting an application to the court along with the original will. This application is called an “Application for a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee,” or a “probate application.”
Once the court reviews George’s application and is satisfied that the will is valid, and that no other wills of Bob’s have been filed with the court, it will issue George a “probate certificate.” With this certificate, George can now begin to manage Bob’s estate. This entire process is known as “probate.”
*It is important to note that there are circumstances where probate is not required. For the purposes of this blog, I will be using an example where probate is required.
Probate Certificate aka “Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee”
A “Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee,” also known as a “probate certificate,” is a document issued by the court that authorizes a person (the executor) to manage an estate.
Example: George needs to close Bob’s bank accounts. He goes to TD Bank and explains that he is the executor of Bob’s estate and wants to access and close his accounts. Since George isn’t listed as an account holder, the bank has no record of him and asks for proof that he’s authorized to act on Bob’s behalf. George must provide a copy of his probate certificate issued by the court to prove he has authority to close the accounts.
Beneficiaries
A beneficiary is a person(s), charity, or organization who receives a gift (aka an inheritance) from someone’s estate after they die.
Example: Bob’s will names his two children, Sally and Donna, as beneficiaries. According to Bob’s will, each of them will receive $100,000.00 from his estate. George is responsible for making this happen. George will pay Sally and Donna each their $100,000.00 using money from Bob’s estate.
This is just one example of how an individual’s estate may be administered after their death. There are many other situations to consider. For example, if a person dies without leaving a will (dying “intestate”), the process for applying for probate will be different. Or, if a will exists but its validity is challenged by a beneficiary or an interested party, the estate may have to go through legal proceedings (“litigation”). Regardless of the specific circumstances, it is important to understand the basic principles of estates in case you ever find yourself responsible for managing a loved one’s estate.
Stacie Chrysanthopoulos
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Mar 19, 2026
A recent decision from the Toronto Estates List has brought into focus the challenges of acting as Section 3 counsel. In Groves v. Groves, 2026 ONSC 1206 (“Groves”), the applicants, Lori Groves and Mark Groves, sought guardianship over their father, John Groves (“John”), and an Order allowing them to apprehend John from his residence where he lived with the respondent, Lourdes Palmer.
John and the respondent had been in an intimate relationship since January 2023. The respondent, who was self-represented, did not seek guardianship over John but argued instead that a neutral guardian ought to be appointed. The respondent also alleged that John’s wishes were that he be protected from the applicants.
The applicants alleged that John, an 85-year-old man diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, had become involved in a predatory relationship with the respondent. The respondent removed John on three occasions from the retirement community where he had previously resided and where he received daily care. She also took John to open a new bank account and arranged for him to move into her home in Barrie. Beginning in March 2024, the respondent prevented the applicants from communicating directly with John and insisted that all communication “between John and his children or friends go through her”.
John had previously undergone multiple capacity assessments and there was extensive medical evidence surrounding John’s cognition and memory. For example, John was found to be incapable of managing property on February 10, 2023 by a capacity assessor. In August 2023, John’s family physician found he had progressive cognitive and functional decline and was vulnerable to “financial and medical abuse”. On June 15, 2025, John was found incapable of instructing legal counsel by another capacity assessor.
Section 3 Counsel’s Involvement
In May 2024, the respondent arranged for John to be represented by counsel. That private retainer was later converted into a section 3 counsel retainer by the Public Guardian and Trustee. Throughout the guardianship proceedings and at the final hearing, section 3 counsel expressed John’s wishes to remain with the respondent and to have access to his funds for travel with the respondent. Section 3 counsel also opposed the application for guardianship and submitted that a third-party attorney for property be appointed to manage John’s property instead. In advance of the application hearing, section 3 counsel filed a letter of wishes containing “John Groves’ position” and a statement of law. As a preliminary issue, the Court deliberated as to whether section 3 counsel’s letter and statement of law should be struck from the record.
The Court analyzed this issue in the context of section 3 counsel’s mandate under the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992, S.O. 1990, c. 30 (the “SDA”) and the applicable case law.
Apart from providing for counsel to be arranged for individuals whose capacity is in question, section 3 of the SDA explicitly deems the individual in question to have capacity to retain and instruct counsel. Early decisions relied upon this deeming provision to differentiate between the role of section 3 counsel and a litigation guardian. Although not relied upon in Groves, in Banton v. Banton 1998 ONSC 14926 (“Banton”), the Court found:
[34] Even in cases where the client is deemed to have capacity to retain and instruct counsel pursuant to section 3(1) of the Act, I do not believe that counsel is in the position of a litigation guardian with authority to make decisions in the client’s interests. Counsel must take instructions from the client and must not, in my view, act if satisfied that capacity to give instructions is lacking.
In Groves, the Court relied significantly on Dawson v Dawson 2020 ONSC 6724 (“Dawson”) which, in keeping with Banton, found that section 3 counsel and a litigation guardian each protect the interests of vulnerable people in distinct ways:
[33] Gomery J. noted that many s. 3 counsel make a tremendous effort to discern their client’s wishes and often provide the court with very helpful insight as a result. However, if they are unable to understand what a client wants, they cannot make decisions on that person’s behalf. By contrast, a litigation guardian stands in the shoes of someone under disability. They do not take instructions from the person under disability but make substitute decisions on their behalf, in accordance with their obligations and powers set out in r. 7.05.
Both Banton and Dawson demonstrate the inherent difficulty in acting as section 3 counsel. Section 3 counsel must continuously exercise their discretion in assessing whether and how their client’s wishes can be taken as instructions. This exercise is complicated in situations where capacity is fluid and where a client is vulnerable to being influenced by parties to the litigation. Underlying it all, lawyers acting as section 3 counsel may find it difficult to reconcile the limits of their role with ensuring that vulnerable individuals have a voice in proceedings that directly affect them.
The issue in Groves was that the Court found that section 3 counsel had overstepped their mandate by acting more like a litigation guardian. The Court found that, as of at least June 2025, John was incapable of giving instructions. A capacity assessment at that time found that John appeared unaware of any conflict with the applicants and the fact that he was represented by section 3 counsel. However, John still maintained an opposition to the application and his wish that section 3 counsel oppose the application despite having no memory of discussing the issue with section 3 counsel.
The Court dealt with the issue as a “matter of fact” finding that, because section 3 counsel could not obtain capable instructions from John, she was “without capable instructions notwithstanding the deeming provision in the SDA” (paragraph 44 of the decision).
On that basis, the Court gave little weight to section 3 counsel’s letter and the statement of law. The Court appeared very concerned at how section 3 counsel took legal positions which were consistent with the type of position that the respondent “would have been expected to take”.
As a matter of form, the Court also took issue with section 3 counsel seeking substantive relief and making assertions of fact within the statement of law, despite John’s apparent incapacity and no originating process or notice of motion to ground the substantive relief that was sought.
Ultimately, the applicants were successful, and the Court was especially unforgiving in its costs award as section 3 counsel’s costs were fixed to the costs that had been incurred prior to the assessment of incapacity on June 15, 2025.
Key Takeaways
Groves demonstrates that the role of section 3 counsel is a difficult one, existing in tension between:
- the duty to advocate for vulnerable individuals;
- the need to monitor capacity, which is often fluid; and
- the challenge of distinguishing between a client’s wishes and instructions that can properly form the basis of a legal position.
Groves adds to this tension. Other decisions have recognized that capacity assessments are not infallible and that capacity is fluid, and have accordingly treated the deeming provision as a “shield” affording section 3 counsel discretion to advocate notwithstanding an assessment of incapacity. For example, in Righter v. Righter, an unreported case, which was relied upon in Miziolek v. Miziolek, 2018 ONSC 2841 (CanLII) the Court found that despite an individual’s incapacity, section 3 counsel “still had a role to play – testing the jurisdiction of the court, authority to make orders, and making submissions on the evidence.”
Groves seems to direct section 3 counsel to immediately limit their involvement where there has been a specific assessment that the individual lacks capacity to give instructions or when there is overwhelming evidence of incapacity. Respectfully, this direction potentially undermines the role of section 3 counsel. A capacity assessment concluding that an individual lacks capacity to give instructions should not prevent section 3 counsel from expressing or acting upon what they deem to be clear wishes and instructions at a later date. To hold otherwise potentially marginalizes the role of section 3 counsel and is contrary to the purpose and function of section 3’s deeming provision.
This is not to say that Groves is inconsistent with section 3 and prior case law. Rather, Groves’ framing of John’s incapacity as a “matter of fact” that prevented section 3 counsel from taking a position or acting meaningfully after June 2025 obscures the underlying issue. At its core, Groves turned on the fact that the Court deeply disagreed with how section 3 counsel interpreted and exercised their role. In that sense, Groves is a testament to the precariousness of acting as section 3 counsel, and the importance of caution and investigation when obtaining a client’s wishes or instructions and acting on them.
In Groves, the medical evidence was extensive and strongly indicated that John’s wishes were unreliable and could not be taken as capable instructions on the issues in the application. On the other hand, can we fault section 3 counsel for their advocacy, and for acting upon wishes that appeared to be consistent throughout their involvement?
Matias Gutierrez
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Mar 12, 2026
Now that many court appearances can be done virtually, lawyers have more flexibility in the files they can take on. In the past, a simple 15-minute scheduling appearance could mean hours of travel, so we had to be cautious about accepting matters in distant jurisdictions. Even though courts are gradually returning to in-person hearings, many procedural attendances are still conducted remotely, so lawyers are less likely to limit their practice to a single city.
One consequence of this is that we now need to understand how to navigate multiple administrative regions across Ontario. Each region has its own practice directions, booking systems, and unwritten customs, and those differences can easily cause delay or frustration if they are unfamiliar.
This blog is the first in a series where I will break down how to book a motion in various cities and towns across Ontario.
Short Motions (under 1 hour):
Although Brampton is part of the Central West Region, the practice directions create a few Brampton‑specific rules, starting with how short motions are booked.
Unlike Milton, Orangeville, Guelph, Owen Sound, and Walkerton, you cannot book a short motion in Brampton by emailing the court to request available dates. Instead, counsel must schedule short motions using the court’s online Calendly system.
Things to keep in mind for Short Motions:
– The practice directions include a helpful tip sheet on using Calendly, linked here
– Self-represented parties that do not have the technology or ability to access the internet may schedule the Short Motion by telephone
– Any cancellations or adjournments using Calendly must be on consent of the parties
– Cancellations and adjournments will not be accepted on Calendly within 10 days of the scheduled hearing date
Long Motions (over 1 hour):
To book a long motion, the parties must first adhere to a timetable for completion of all the necessary steps (i.e. delivery of materials, cross-examinations, etc.) to be considered “ready” to proceed with the motion hearing.
If the parties agree on a timetable, it can be sent to the court with a request that it be endorsed and made into a Court Order.
If the parties cannot agree on a timetable within 45 days of service of the moving party’s motion record, any party can request an attendance at Triage Court to set a timetable. This is done by completing the Requisition to Attend Long Motion Triage Court Form, linked here, and emailing it to SCJtrialofficebrampton@ontario.ca. In Brampton, triage court is held every Tuesday at 9:00 a.m.
Once the timetable has been set and complied with, the parties are considered “ready” to book their long motion hearing date. This is also done at triage court, using the same requisition and email process that applies if the parties cannot agree on a timetable and must attend triage court to set one.
Things to keep in mind for Triage Court:
– Gowns are not required at triage court
– Each matter at triage court is limited to 10 minutes
– It is the responsibility of the party scheduling the triage court date to inform the other parties immediately in writing
– Do not ask the judge for a motion date unless all of the steps in the timetable are adhered to – it will not go well
Staying current with the latest regional notices and practice directions helps avoid unnecessary delays and ensures that matters proceed smoothly. Stay tuned for my next blog post, where I walk through the process for another city or town in a different administrative region.
Please remember that scheduling procedures change frequently. Always review the most recent Central West Region practice direction and any local notices specific to Brampton before scheduling.
Colleen Dowling
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Mar 11, 2026
In Smith v. Bechtel, 2026 ONSC 975, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice considered whether an unsigned draft will prepared by a lawyer could be treated as a valid will under s. 21.1 of the Succession Law Reform Act.
The case highlights an issue that sometimes arises when someone begins the process of making a will but dies before it is formally signed. The court was asked to decide whether the draft document should be treated as the deceased’s will, or whether the estate should instead be distributed according to Ontario’s intestacy rules.
Background
Timothy Bechtel died suddenly on September 30, 2024. He had never married, had no common law spouse, and had no children. He was survived by several siblings and the children of a predeceased brother. Importantly, Mr. Bechtel did not have an ongoing relationship with his siblings.
About two weeks before his death, Mr. Bechtel met with a lawyer to prepare a will and powers of attorney. The lawyer took handwritten notes during the meeting and later prepared draft documents reflecting those instructions. A letter enclosing the drafts was left for Mr. Bechtel to pick up, along with a request that he review the documents and advise the lawyer of any changes before a scheduled appointment to sign them.
Mr. Bechtel died twelve days later, before the documents could be reviewed or executed.
What Did Mr. Bechtel’s Draft Will Say?
The draft will set out a specific plan for how Mr. Bechtel’s estate should be distributed. It appointed the applicant, Tammy Lyn Smith, as estate trustee. Ms. Smith had previously worked as Mr. Bechtel’s office manager and remained a close friend after her employment ended.
The draft will also included several gifts to individuals and a charity, including:
- $75,000 to each of Mr. Bechtel’s three nephews
- $100,000 to a friend
- $50,000 to another friend
- $75,000 to the Arnprior Humane Society
- A riding lawn mower to a neighbour
After those gifts were paid, the remaining estate was to go to Ms. Smith. Notably, Mr. Bechtel’s siblings were not included as beneficiaries under the draft will.
What Would Happen to Mr. Bechtel’s Estate Without a Valid Will?
If a person dies without a valid will, their estate is distributed according to Ontario’s intestacy rules, which are set out in the Succession Law Reform Act. These rules determine who inherits based on a fixed order of family relationships.
Because Mr. Bechtel had no spouse and no children, his estate would be distributed to his next closest relatives, which in this case meant his surviving siblings and the children of his predeceased brother. In other words, if the draft will was not validated, the estate would pass to family members who were not beneficiaries under the draft will, rather than to the friends and charity named in that document.
This created the central legal question in the case: Should the court treat the draft will as Mr. Bechtel’s valid will, or should the estate be distributed according to the intestacy rules?
The Legal Context
Under the Succession Law Reform Act, a will is normally only valid if it meets certain formal requirements. Among other things, it must be signed by the testator in the presence of two witnesses, who must also sign the will.
The draft will in this case had not been signed or witnessed, so it did not meet those requirements.
However, s. 21.1 of the SLRA, which came into force in 2022, allows the court to validate a document that does not meet the formal requirements if the court is satisfied that the document sets out the testamentary intentions of the deceased. In other words, the court can treat a document as a valid will if it is satisfied that it reflects the deceased person’s final intentions for how their estate should be distributed.
Ms. Smith’s Evidence
The applicant, Ms. Smith, relied on several pieces of evidence to support the application.
- The lawyer who prepared the draft will testified that Mr. Bechtel attended their meeting alone, appeared to have capacity, and seemed clear about how he wanted to distribute his estate.
- The applicant also found a handwritten document in Mr. Bechtel’s home listing his assets and setting out general instructions about certain gifts, with the remainder of the estate going to the applicant.
- In addition, the applicant and a charity had been named as beneficiaries of certain insurance and investment assets.
While this evidence suggested that Mr. Bechtel intended certain people to benefit from his estate rather than his siblings, the court noted that expressions of intention alone are not enough to establish a valid will.
The Court’s Decision
The court ultimately concluded that the draft will could not be validated.
One of the key issues was that there was no evidence that Mr. Bechtel had reviewed the draft will prepared by his lawyer. The lawyer’s letter specifically asked Mr. Bechtel to review the document and advise of any changes or corrections, indicating that the document was still part of an ongoing drafting process.
The court also noted that the deadline for providing feedback on the draft had not yet passed when Mr. Bechtel died.
In addition, the handwritten list found in Mr. Bechtel’s home contained differences from the draft will, including different amounts and beneficiaries.
The court noted that people often reconsider their decisions while a will is being drafted. Because there was no evidence that Mr. Bechtel had reviewed or approved the draft, it was not possible to conclude that the document represented his final testamentary intentions.
For that reason, the court declined to validate the draft will under s. 21.1 of the SLRA. As a result, Mr. Bechtel’s estate would be distributed according to the intestacy rules.
Takeaways
Smith v. Bechtel illustrates the limits of the court’s power to validate documents that do not meet the formal requirements for a will.
Even though the evidence suggested that Mr. Bechtel had begun the process of creating a will and had discussed his wishes with a lawyer, the court was not satisfied that the draft document represented his final decision about how his estate should be distributed.
The case serves as a reminder that the process of preparing a will is not complete until the document is reviewed, finalized, and properly executed.
Diana Begaliyeva
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Mar 11, 2026
A judgment has been awarded to you, but the money hasn’t arrived, yet. We’ve discussed the option of Garnishment in my previous blog. You probably have also heard of a Writ of Seizure and Sale, but how to start the process? Does it have to be filed at the Sheriff’s Office? Did you also accidentally call the York regional police for a sheriff? Oops! Fortunately, there is a new route to have a Writ issued electronically via WritFiling. We will walk you through both options.
Issuance Through the Registrar
A creditor can submit a Writ of Seizure and Sale (Form 60A) (“Writ”) to be issued with a Requisition form at the court registrar where the original proceeding commenced[1].
The Requisition form should detail the date and the amount of payment received, the amount owing, and the rate of post-judgement interest[2]. A copy of the Order should be attached to the Requisition form.
Once a Writ is issued, it may be filed with a Sheriff[3]. The Sheriff’s office is the Enforcement office of the Superior Court of Justice (NOT the police office!)
While the Writ should be issued where the Judgment was granted, it must be filed at the Enforcement office in the region where the debtor lives or owns assets. For example, if your judgment is issued in Toronto and the debtor lives in Richmond Hill. The Writ should be issued in Toronto, but the issued Writ is to be filed at the Sheriff’s Office in Newmarket court.
You may locate the Enforcement office through the following website: https://www.onwrits.ca/en/enforcement-offices/.
For Writ of Seizure and Sale of a property, the Writ should include a legal description of the real property, which can be found in the parcel register. Check out my previous blog: a walk through of the parcel register.
Issuance Through the WritFiling
During the Covid-19 pandemic, technology streamlined the process for legal professionals to issue and file Writs remotely[4].
An authorized user such as a lawyer or a paralegal[5] (for Form 20D: Writ of Seizure and Sale of Land only) may electronically issue the Writ through WritFiling, a product of Teranet software, instead of filing through registrar and enforcement office[6]. An electronically issued Writ is considered to have been both issued by the court and filed with the Sheriff[7].
To use this service, authorized users may submit an application and will receive a secure token. WritFiling has very detailed user guide on application and how to file and issue a Writ.
The filing process is very straightforward, and the issued Writ is designed to be clear and easy to understand. A service fee of $34.95 plus HST will be applied each time. Below is a sample of an electronically issued Writ of Seizure and Sale for your reference.
Whether you choose to file the Writ through the court registrar yourself or retain a lawyer to file through WritFiling, understanding the procedural nuances is the key to successfully enforcing the Judgment and collecting the debts. In my next blog, we will dive deeper into the next phase: how to direct the Sheriff to enforce your issued Writ.
Jennifer Jiang
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
[1] Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Regulation 194 [“Rules”], Rule 60.07(1).
[2] ibid
[3] Ibid at Rule 60.07 (5.1)
[4] “Teranet WritFling Solution Expands Services to Offer Convenience and Facilitate Collaboration.” Teranet, November 23, 2020, Online: <https://www.teranet.ca/insights/teranet-writfiling-solution-expands-services-to-offer-convenience-and-facilitate-collaboration/>
[5] Supra at Rule 60.07(0.1)
[6] Rules, Rule 60.07(1.1)
[7] Ibid at Rule 60.07(1.3); “How do I file/issue or file a writ?”, WritFiling, Online:<https://www.onwrits.ca/en/help-support/support/faq/issue-file-a-writ/how-do-i-file-issue-or-file-a-writ/>
Mar 5, 2026
In law school, we learn how to read a set of facts, find the legal issues, the applicable legal tests, and apply them to answer some hypothetical question.
What we do not learn, at least not in detail, is how to prepare for court in practical ways, aside from knowing the law. This is where the articling experience comes in.
So far, in my articling term at Casey & Moss LLP, I have been fortunate to attend, observe, and even speak in court. I was understandably nervous at first, but I came to appreciate that pre-court nerves are part of the process, and everyone experiences them in some way or another (or so I’ve been told…).
Setting aside the inevitable nerves, my in-court experiences have taught me practical lessons that extend beyond what is covered in law school lectures. I share a few of them below.
Lesson 1: You Need to Read the Practice Directions. Then Read Them Again.
Before you step into a courtroom, you need to have read and understood the practice directions for that specific court. In fact, before even getting to the court part, you need to ensure that your filed materials comply with the court’s filing requirements.
Thankfully for me, at Casey & Moss LLP, our lawyers are diligent about updating one another on interesting finds in the practice directions and drawing attention to any important changes or new discoveries in the filing requirements.
As an articling student, I’ve witnessed how staying on top of these changes translates into preparation for court: A lawyer who knows the law can make an argument, but a lawyer who knows the law and the practice directions can make sure to have that argument heard.
Lesson 2: If You Raise It, You Better Know Where It Is in Your Evidence
Observing courtroom advocacy taught me that every oral submission must be grounded in the evidence, and that counsel must know precisely where that evidence can be found.
This means knowing:
- The specific document in the evidentiary record that supports each part of your submission;
- The Case Center reference for where it can be located;
- The exact paragraph or page number you intend to direct the judge to; and
- What you are asking the court to take away from that particular passage.
That level of familiarity does not happen by accident. Hours of prep go into it.
But there is also something reassuring about watching experienced counsel field questions from judges in real time. When asked a difficult question, they do not panic. Often, they respectfully pause their submissions to acknowledge the question, clarify what is being asked if needed, and either provide the pinpoint to the answer or ask for a brief opportunity to retrieve it during a break.
As the articling student, this often means you were diligently taking notes of the judge’s questions and flipping through the record, locating the exact document or paragraph, and flagging it for supervising counsel before submissions resume.
To do this effectively, I have found it essential to:
- Read the pleadings and all materials before the court in advance. Reviewing them close enough to the hearing date to remain familiar with the details makes a significant difference in how well you can follow submissions and understand the issues as they unfold.
- Become comfortable not only with the evidence itself, but also with the platform that houses it. In matters before the Superior Court of Justice, that platform is Case Center, the court’s mandatory document-sharing system. Being able to navigate it quickly and confidently is a practical and meaningful way to support counsel during a hearing.
Lesson 3: What To Wear to Court
Courtroom wardrobe logistics are not discussed in law school.
Some attendances require robes. Others, such as case conferences, do not (but read the practice directions to be sure!).
For now, as an articling student, my uniform is usually a black blazer. No one expects me to appear in robes I do not yet have, so at this stage, I am thankfully spared the added stress of wondering whether my robes are at home or at the office, though I understand that day will come soon enough.
But even when robes are not required, the setting remains formal, so suit jackets and blazers are always a good option when in doubt.
Lesson 4: You Can’t Drink Coffee in Court!
One of the most devastating news I found out through experience rather than education was that you cannot drink coffee in court. Nor can you eat anything, or chew gum. But hey, at least you can drink water!
Preparation includes these practical considerations. Eat beforehand. Bring a snack for the break. If you plan to grab lunch nearby, make sure you leave enough time not only for the food to arrive and to eat, but also to debrief with counsel or take care of any last minute tasks during the recess. As a student, and even as counsel, breaks may often be spent researching, finding documents, or tracking down pinpoints, so having food handy is always a good idea.
There are also smaller details that matter, many of which I learned through guidance from helpful court staff:
- Your jacket should not be draped over the back of your chair, or lounging on top of a seat. Keep it on your lap or neatly tucked away behind your chair.
- If you are taking notes, make it clear that you are doing so for legitimate reasons. Recording a court proceeding is not permitted in any shape or format. If you are typing on a phone or tablet, it can easily be misunderstood. It is better to clarify at the outset to court staff, before the hearing commences, that you are taking notes to assist counsel and are authorized to do so, and for no other purpose.
Those are all my list of lessons learned for now!
If you have others that I missed, feel free to send me an email: fseddigh@caseyandmoss.com. I’ll take all the courtroom tips I can get.
Fara Seddigh
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Feb 17, 2026
Hollywood has done it again. They’ve made a movie that makes you ask yourself, “is this just a movie, or is it a possible reality?”
In the movie “Mercy” a detective with the Los Angeles Police Department is put on trial before an AI Judge for the murder of his wife, Nicole. All the evidence points to Chris having killed his wife, so he is required to go before the AI Judge and make a case that will lower his probability of guilt to 92%. While on trial, the AI Judge gives Chris access to all available resources and information he may need to use as evidence to prove his innocence. He may ask the AI Judge for documents, police records/evidence, access to live and recorded camera/video footage, make phone calls to the police department, or anyone relevant to proving his innocence, and much more. He is given 90 minutes before the AI Judge to prove his innocence. Failure to do so will result in immediate execution.
The AI Judge in the movie is designed to be an objective, data-driven system free from human emotion and prejudice, operating within a program to ensure a 100% accuracy rate for conviction. However, the film also highlights how, (spoiler alert!), the system can make incorrect, life-or-death decisions.
There is no secret that technology is advancing and that AI is everywhere. With the progression of AI, the thought in my mind has always been whether my professional life/career would be impacted and, if so, how and how much. I always thought my career wouldn’t be impacted very much given the nature of my work. However, this movie opened my eyes to the likelihood that anything could be possible.
At the end of the day, this is a movie. But, what if one day it becomes reality?
Movie trailer: Mercy Official Trailer
Samantha Valvona
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Jan 30, 2026
I’ve recently become a big fan of the British drama Downton Abbey which ran for six series (or ‘seasons’ for us North American folk) from 2010 to 2015, plus five Christmas specials and three feature films. The show centres around an aristocratic English family in the early 20th century who live in the fictional Yorkshire estate of Downton.
The premise of the first series is that Robert Crawley (the Earl of Grantham and the holder of the entail – or life tenancy – that consists of the Downton estate) and his wife have three daughters but no sons. The problem with the entail is that only male heirs could inherit. Thus, Robert’s eldest daughter Mary could never inherit the Downton estate. [Warning: series 3 and 4 spoilers ahead!]
Through a series of events, it was discovered that Robert’s distant cousin Matthew Crawley was the heir presumptive to the entail. Matthew would inherit the entail after Robert’s death and become the next Earl of Grantham. As TV dramas go, Mary and Matthew end up falling in love and marrying. Then, Robert falls into financial trouble and Matthew bails him out by purchasing half of Robert’s life interest in Downton. This gave Matthew control over Downton during Robert’s lifetime. When Robert died, Matthew would become the Earl of Grantham and inherit the whole entail.
Sadly, Matthew dies prematurely in a tragic car accident, with his widow Mary and newborn son George as his survivors. We learn that Matthew died without a will. (Side note, Matthew was a solicitor and didn’t make a will. Tsk.) Since he died intestate, his infant son inherited Matthew’s estate, which included the one-half ownership in Robert’s life interest of Downton.
Robert unilaterally decided that he should be the guardian of George’s share in Downton until he turned 18, probably so that he could take back full control of Downton. Mary objects to that plan and puts herself forward to be the guardian. Family tension! Drama!
It is later discovered that Matthew wrote a letter to Mary and put it in a book in his office just days before he died, which purported to leave his entire estate to her:
My darling Mary,
We are off to Duneagle in the morning and I have suddenly realised that I’ve never made a will or anything like one, which seems pretty feeble for a lawyer and you being pregnant makes it even more irresponsible. I’ll do it properly when I get back and tear this up before you ever see it, but I’ll feel easier that I’ve recorded on paper that I wish you to be my sole heiress. I cannot know if our baby is a boy or a girl but I do know it will be a baby. If anything happens to me before I’ve drawn up a will and so you must take charge. And now I shall sign this and get off home for dinner with you. What a lovely, lovely thought.
Matthew
[Author’s note: WHY would Matthew leave the letter in a book? WHY didn’t he give it to her or put it somewhere more conspicuous? This is pretty bad estate planning for a solicitor.]
The letter was witnessed by two of Matthew’s clients.
Gasp! Is this Matthew’s Last Will and Testament?
Robert’s lawyer investigates, and concludes that Matthew’s letter demonstrates testamentary intention and therefore is upheld as his Last Will and Testament. So, Mary owns half of the Downton estate while Robert’s alive! All’s well that ends well.
Now that I’ve given you a comprehensive play by play of the juicy drama, let’s apply it to modern-day Ontario law.
Intestate Succession
If Mary and Matthew were a married couple with a child in Ontario, would their child inherit the entirety of Matthew’s estate if he died without a will?
Short answer: No. Intestate succession is governed by the Succession Law Reform Act. It provides that where the testator was survived by a spouse and one child, the spouse is entitled to the preferential share of the estate, which is currently prescribed by legislation as $300,000. After payment of the preferential share, the residue of the estate is split into two parts, one for each of the spouse and the child.
For illustrative purposes, let’s say Matthew’s estate was worth $500,000. Mary would get the first $300,000, and the remaining $200,000 would be split equally between Mary and George. Mary would end up with $400,000, and George would get $100,000.
Guardianship of Property of Minors
If George were a baby in Ontario and suddenly inherited money from his deceased father’s estate, could his grandfather Robert or mother Mary simply assume the role as the guardian of George’s property?
Short answer: No. Neither Mary nor Robert can simply assume the role as guardian of George’s property. Assuming that Matthew died intestate, George’s inheritance would have to be paid to the Accountant of the Superior Court of Justice to be held in trust and managed on his behalf until he turned 18 years old. The alternative is for Robert or Mary to apply for guardianship of George’s property under the Children’s Law Reform Act. If guardianship were granted, they would be responsible for managing George’s property pursuant to a court-approved management plan until he turns 18 years old.
Formalities of a Will
Is Matthew’s letter a valid will under Ontario laws?
Short answer: Likely yes. The Succession Law Reform Act requires that wills be in writing, signed by the testator at its end, and witnessed by two witnesses. Testators can also make a holograph will by writing the whole will in his own handwriting and signature, without the requirement of witnessing signatures.
Assuming that there was no dispute that Matthew handwrote the letter and signed it at the end, and since he stated his testamentary intention to dispose of his property by bequeathing his estate to Mary, the letter would likely be upheld as a valid holograph will. The two witness signatures are nice to have but not required, since the letter was written wholly in Matthew’s handwriting.
I have yet to finish the entire show so please no spoilers for series 5, 6, or the films!
Zara Wong
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Jan 23, 2026
Dealing with estates involves more than Wills, probate and distribution. It also includes the emotional challenges families face in coping with loss, especially in sudden deaths.
No one is fully prepared for loss, even if the deceased was ill for an extended time. However, the deceased preparing and providing instructions can certainly assist the family.
Here are some suggestions to help your family navigate estate matters.
Wills
Inform your family that you have made a Will if you have one. Sometimes families are unaware of the existence of a Will and this can lead to time-consuming searches. There are instances where family members discover the Will a year or two later.
You should also consider discussing the Will’s contents with your family to avoid potential disputes or objections during probate. Quite often, equalization arises when spouses feel they are entitled to more than their allocated percentage, while some children may believe they had contributed more to their parent’s well-being and should therefore receive a larger share.
If you do not have a Will, you should strongly consider making one.
Assets
Make a list of your assets and store it in a safe location for easy retrieval. The list of your assets should include, but are not limited to, bank accounts, shares and investments, personal effects, and real property.
Estate trustees and family members often encounter difficulties in locating assets. Contacting financial institutions and enquiring about potential assets and investments left by the deceased can be costly and again time-consuming.
Health
While some individuals may prefer to keep their health concerns private from their families, it is advisable to disclose them. This ensures that in the event of an emergency or sudden passing, their loved ones are not taken by surprise.
If you are hesitant to share this information with your family, at least confide in a trusted family friend and seek their support for the family when needed.
It is also wise to discuss your future healthcare needs and wishes, particularly when you may lose the ability to make decisions for yourself. If you do not have one, you should strongly consider establishing a power of attorney for personal care.
Funeral Arrangements and Burial
Have a family discussion regarding burial preferences. Families often experience emotional distress and confusion during the period immediately after a death and disagreements on this issue can lead to family discord. Leaving clear instructions will prevent this problem.
Legal Representation
It is advisable to retain a lawyer to advise you on Wills, probate and estate-related legal issues.
Casey and Moss is committed to providing quality service with respect to estate matters.
Roslyn Blackette
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
Jan 16, 2026
Zara is an exceptionally skilled estates litigator. She’s tenacious and never shies away from a challenge. Her talents have been recognized by Best Lawyers of Canada – Ones to Watch, and Post City Lawyers as one of the best estates lawyers in Toronto.
Zara has been a key member of the Casey & Moss team since she joined us as a law student nearly a decade ago. We are thrilled Zara is advancing her career with us as an equity partner, and look forward to her continued success!
Nothing contained in this post constitutes legal advice or establishes a solicitor-client relationship. If you have any questions regarding your legal rights or legal obligations, you should consult a lawyer.
