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.
Oct 31, 2025
This is my first blog as a proud new lawyer at this fantastic firm, and I’ve decided to write about the role of financial institutions – banks in particular – in the early stages of estate litigation. The reason for this topic is in that this past year, banks have managed to play a big role in some of my and my colleagues’ files despite having no stake in the litigation.
I’ve created two scenarios, based upon these experiences, which will illustrate how banks can shape the early stages of estate litigation. My hope is that these scenarios can aid in understanding what banks may or may not do – which in turn, may help frame client expectations and inform early strategic decisions.
Scenario #1
Your client is the estate trustee and residue beneficiary of an estate. They have been acting for well over a year and have disposed of all the estate property and have distributed multiple cash legacies. All that remains is the residue. The accountant is waiting for a clearance certificate and anticipates no issues in that regard.
Your client decides to withdraw the residue now that everything appears OK.
When your client arrives at the bank, they are informed that the estate account has been frozen. The bank received a letter which indicated that ‘probate was being challenged’. The bank refuses to disclose any further information.
Your client calls you, obviously very concerned and stressed. They were really relying on this money. So, you contact the bank and they inform you of a few things:
- The letter did NOT enclose a court order, judgment, or writ authorizing the freeze.
- The letter was from a lawyer, who appeared to be representing a friend of the deceased.
- The friend was seeking to challenge the Will; however, they had not commenced proceedings of any kind.
- They refused to disclose the contact information of the lawyer until they obtained the other lawyer’s consent.
The authority that the bank was relying upon to freeze the account was the terms and conditions of their personal chequing accounts. As the estate account had formerly been a personal account, the estate account was bound to those terms. The terms allow the bank to unilaterally freeze accounts, without notice to account holders, if it is ‘unclear’ who the funds in the account belong to. The ‘freezing clause’ is a standard form term in all personal account agreements across the ‘Big 5’ Canadian banks.
You write a letter, demonstrating that your client is the only person with authority to act and arguing that the residue is held in trust for them, but the bank does not care. They advise that they ‘take no position’, and that they will be requiring either a court order or the consent of all parties, to unfreeze the account.
This is a paradoxical non-position: inert yet immensely prejudicial. Schrodinger would be proud.
To be fair to the bank and their policy, there is an obvious concern for liability. Yet the same terms that authorize the freeze also contain a waiver and indemnity, and where a bank obeys the authority of probate, who could realistically fault the bank for doing so?
Overall, this was a fantastic early victory for the Will challenger. Without going to Court, they’ve managed to obtain essentially a Mareva injunction. Where there is a risk of dissipation, parties should consider writing, at first instance, to all banks where the testator may have had accounts. The banks’ internal policies, terms, and conditions regarding personal accounts and estate accounts may result in a timely and effective freeze.
Scenario #2
Your client is a director and minority shareholder of a family business. The family business has been struggling with no business or activity in many months, but it remains the beneficiary of a sizeable life insurance policy insuring the life of your client’s father. Your client’s father was also a director and a majority shareholder of the family business. The father’s Will appoints your client’s brother as Estate Trustee. Your client and his brother are residue beneficiaries.
Your client’s father passes away, and the policy becomes payable. It is not technically an estate asset, although it benefits the family business to which both your client and his brother are entitled.
Unbeknownst to your client, the brother, who has yet to obtain probate, writes to the bank asking for the business accounts to be frozen based upon his authority as the named Estate Trustee and expressing concern that your client may steal company funds. The brother is highly suspicious and does not trust your client in the slightest. The brother believes that your client will abscond with the life insurance funds through his position as director/shareholder. The brother eventually intends to pursue legal action on behalf of the estate against your client and claims there is troubling evidence that your client has committed wrongdoing.
You help your client investigate and you later find out that the bank denied his brother’s demand. Their position was that as his brother was not an authorized signatory to the corporate accounts, the bank would not freeze the account without a Court order. It turns out that the terms and conditions of corporate accounts are much less draconian than personal accounts, and further, they impose a burden upon the corporate accountholder to ensure account security. When considering requests to freeze corporate accounts, it seems the banks rely solely upon who is an authorized signatory (and a handy waiver/indemnity).
Perhaps if the brother had probate, the bank would have listened. However, the challenger in Scenario #1 certainly did not have probate – and yet the bank still felt compelled to freeze the account.
I’m sure I will encounter more scenarios such as these in the future, where banks will influence the nature of litigation early on with profound consequences. Knowing that banks will take these types of ‘non-positions’ can help frame client expectations and encourage early action where it benefits client interests.
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.
Dec 3, 2024
Billionaire and philanthropist Warren Buffet is one of the most successful businessmen of all time. In 2006, the “Oracle of Omaha” pledged to give away 99% of his wealth to charitable foundations and has asked other billionaires to commit to donating at least 50% of their wealth to charity.
Recently, Buffett penned a letter regarding some changes to how his wealth will be distributed after his death. His original plan was for his three children to act as trustees to distribute his money after his death. But, because Buffett’s three children are now 71, 69, and 66, he recognized that it might take longer than his children’s lifetimes to distribute his massive fortune.
Thus, Buffett appointed three successor trustees, all younger in age than his children, to take over the distribution of his wealth in the event that his children die before they can disburse all of his assets.
While I could write several blog posts on the duties and responsibilities of trustees and successor trustees, that is not the focus of today’s post. What I found most interesting in Buffett’s letter was his commentary on parents making wills and involving their children in that process.
Buffett suggested that parents should have their children, once mature, read their wills before they are executed. He wrote:
Be sure each child understands both the logic for your decisions and the responsibilities they will encounter upon your death. If any have questions or suggestions, listen carefully and adopt those found sensible. You don’t want your children asking “Why?” in respect to testamentary decisions when you are no longer able to respond.
He continued:
I change my will every couple of years – often only in very minor ways – and keep things simple. Over the years, Charlie [Munger] and I saw many families driven apart after the posthumous dictates of the will left beneficiaries confused and sometimes angry. Jealousies, along with actual or imagined slights during childhood, became magnified, particularly when sons were favored over daughters, either in monetary ways or by positions of importance.
Charlie and I also witnessed a few cases where a wealthy parent’s will that was fully discussed before death helped the family become closer. What could be more satisfying?
I think Buffett’s suggestions are well-intentioned and can benefit families that are not dysfunctional or fractured in the first place. It is almost always a good idea to express your testamentary wishes to your family members and educate them on the details of your estate before you pass away. Not only so they aren’t shocked about what they are entitled to receive (or not) under your will or what your estate assets comprise of (or not) when the estate is being distributed, but also so that your loved ones are prepared for the duties and responsibilities associated with the estate administration, e.g. as named estate trustee or trustee of testamentary trusts. Parents may wish to deliver a letter to their children setting out their wishes and reasons behind them, à la Warren Buffett, or they may wish to have a family meeting or series of family meetings to discuss their estate plan and answer their loved ones’ questions.
This process may not work where existing dynamics between the testator (often the elderly parent) and the person expecting to inherit are imbalanced. Where there are concerns about the elderly parent’s safety or wellbeing if their testamentary wishes are disclosed, this process may not be advisable.
As an estates litigator, I see complex family dynamics play out in very real (and time-consuming and expensive) ways after a testator’s death. Whenever possible and practicable, a frank and open discussion about a parent’s estate plan and testamentary wishes can go a long way to avoid costly litigation and keep family relationships intact after the parent’s death.
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.
