Does Being a Caregiver to your Elder Parents entitle you to a Greater Inheritance?
As we have consistently noted, Wills & Estates Litigation is always a controversial, and sensitive topic. In essence, lawyers and children (typically), are discussing what a child is entitled to from their parents’ estate, and upon their mother and father’s passing.
Unfortunately, because this field of law is highly litigated in the Province of BC, it is a topic we must canvass.
Often, TRI-CITY LEGAL gets phone calls re the subsequent scenarios:
On one hand, a son or daughter is the primary caregiver of their last living parent and is seeking information as to whether their efforts - often living with the elder and taking care of their daily needs - entitles him/her to a greater percentage of the estate.
On the other hand, we are contacted by children whom are not the caregivers, have been disinherited from the estate, and are seeking legal recourse.
Plainly, being a caregiver to your elder parents does not entitle you to a greater inheritance.
Being a caregiver to your elder parents does not entitle you to a greater inheritance.
Instead, the Court must balance the will-maker’s wishes (as set out in a will) with the legal requirements for a testator (aka the deceased parents) to provide adequate, just, and equitable provisions for his/her children.
A recent example of the above situation is the case of Tang v Tom, 2021 BCSC 1399. In this case, the deceased parent’s had five (5) children but left the bulk of their estate to two (2). The Mother, who was widowed, stated as follows:
Ever since your father passed away, Kwok Sun [Samsun] and Pui Ying [Rose] have been attending to my daily needs and looking after my well-being. It is with their help that I have managed to make it through these times of sorrow and regain a tranquil life. Also, they live with me and bring me comfort.
As such, the Mother bequeathed 60% of the family home (on West 64th in Vancouver) to one son and 40% to one daughter.
As a result of being disinherited, the three remaining children brought forward a wills’ variation claim.
BC Courts must balance the testator’s wishes while providing adequate, just, and equitable provisions for the testator’s children.
Mr. Justice Edleman, as he is required to do, balanced the interests of the testator and the children and varied the will. The Trial Judge stated as follows:
I am…of the view that a somewhat greater gift to Rose and Samsun is warranted given the clear intentions of Mrs. Tom. I will therefore order specific gifts of $300,000 to each of Rose and Samsun (or Samsun’s estate). The remainder of the estate is to be divided equally between the five siblings or their estates. In my view, this variation strikes the appropriate balance between Mrs. Tom’s clear intent to recognize the role of Samsun and Rose in her final years while meeting her moral obligations to her other children.
If you have any questions or are seeking to hire an Wills and Estate Litigation Lawyer, please contact us for a FREE 30 minute, no obligation consultation via phone, email, or filling-out the form below.
You can reach TRI-CITY LEGAL at (604) 628 8952; via email at: vsm@tricitylegal.ca; or fill out the form below: