Overview In Barker v. Barker, Bob Alan Barker accused his sister, Catherine Elizabeth Barker, of mismanaging their late brother John Joseph Barker’s estate. Bob sought to remove Catherine as Estate Trustee and bar her from inheriting, alleging she breached her fiduciary duty by misappropriating John’s funds. The case centered on Bob’s motion for financial document production, which Justice Papageorgiou partially granted on May 2, 2025. This ruling underscores the courts’ commitment to ensuring accountability in estate administration. Ready to

Ontario courts take issues of mental capacity seriously, particularly when it affects a person’s ability to manage property, make personal care decisions, or instruct legal counsel. Two distinct—but occasionally overlapping—legal tools are available to the court in these situations: A mental health examination under section 105 of the Courts of Justice Act, often used to assess whether a party is a “person under disability” in litigation; and A capacity assessment under section 79 of the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992,

In Gruber v. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2025 ONSC 3088, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice was asked to interpret the will of Yaacov Glickman, a deceased academic who left his entire estate to support Jewish-Arab academic cooperation through an “endowment” at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The estate trustee, concerned about ambiguity in the testamentary language and the risk of the gift failing for uncertainty, brought an application for advice and directions. Justice Papageorgiou ultimately upheld the

Ontario Court Upholds PGT as Litigation Guardian in Duffy v. McDaniel, Reinforcing Strict Evidentiary Standards for Capacity In *Duffy v. McDaniel, 2025 ONSC 2899 (CanLII)*, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice addressed a motion to remove the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT) as the litigation guardian for Stephen Duffy, a plaintiff who suffered a traumatic brain injury in a 2021 motor vehicle accident. The court, presided over by Justice Corthorn, dismissed the motion, finding insufficient evidence to establish that

Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 2766   In Ko v. Li, Justice FL Myers addressed a case involving the applicant’s legal counsel submitting a factum that contained fictitious and mis-cited cases. The court suspected these errors were the result of AI-generated content, specifically citing potential “hallucinations” where AI produces fabricated or inaccurate information. The factum’s references to non-existent or incorrectly cited cases raised concerns about the integrity of the court process, as such submissions could mislead the court and

Scott v. Wilson, 2025 ONSC 2981: Court Orders Capacity Assessment Over Objections Amid Power Struggles Guardianship Dispute Justice C. Gilmore of the Ontario Superior Court (Estates List) ordered a capacity assessment under section 79 of the Substitute Decisions Act, 1992 despite opposition from the allegedly incapable adult and her common-law spouse. The case illustrates how courts protect vulnerable adults from undue influence, manage conflicting power of attorney claims, and prioritize objective capacity determinations when family dynamics compromise independent decision-making.