Saskatchewan court disregards parties’ agreement supporting granting of appeal
Despite three siblings’ agreement to the grant of an appeal, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the correctness of the chambers judge’s order for a trial to prove their mother’s will in solemn form.
Wiebe v Dopko, 2026 SKCA 82, involved the estate of Annie Dopko, who left five surviving children: Marianne, Jerry, Elaine, Mervin, and William. After her death, her children unsuccessfully searched for her will.
On the assumption that Annie had passed away intestate, the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench granted letters of administration to Marianne and Jerry. The five children executed a settlement agreement to distribute the estate value equally among them as beneficiaries under an intestacy.
Five years after the death, Mervin discovered what appeared to be his mother’s holographic will, which favoured him over his siblings.
Jerry and Elaine, the respondents in this case, applied to revoke the grant of letters of administration, to declare the settlement agreement void, and to enable the estate to recover farmland distributed under the agreement.
Chambers judge’s decision
On July 9, 2024, the chambers judge found a trial necessary to prove the will in solemn form. Without a trial, she refused to resolve the parties’ opposing positions on the will’s veracity and the question of whether to rescind the settlement agreement.
Appeal
Marianne and her husband John appealed.
The appellants and the respondents agreed that the appeal court should allow the appeal and set aside the order requiring the will’s proof in solemn form. These parties alleged that the chambers judge committed a legal error by failing to address the issues.
The other parties – William, Mervin, and the estate – provided no submissions.
Trial will proceed to prove the will
Regardless of the parties’ support for allowing the appeal, the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan dismissed the appeal upon determining that the chambers judge made no legal error and took the necessary steps to fulfill the court’s duty to Annie.
While affirming the validity of the grant of letters of administration, the appeal court paused any additional asset distribution until the Court of King’s Bench’s decision on whether there was proof of the will in solemn form.
Given the circumstances, the estate should pay all other parties’ costs in the Court of King’s Bench and in the appeal court.
Saskatchewan Court of Appeal’s findings
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal acknowledged that determining the settlement agreement’s enforceability under contract law without first requiring the will’s proof in solemn form might resolve the outstanding issues more economically.
However, the appeal court held that granting the parties’ requested relief would require it to:
- Ignore the Court of King’s Bench’s role as the probate court
- Treat the will’s validity as irrelevant to the settlement agreement’s enforceability
- Bypass the appropriate procedure for an application to revoke a grant of letters of administration
The appeal court noted that two beneficiaries under the intestacy and under the will had taken no position on appeal.
Previous estate law cases
Here are some other estate law decisions from Canada’s appeal courts.
The Alberta Court of Appeal issued a July 3 decision denying an appeal brought by the estate’s current personal representative, who wanted the estate’s prior personal representatives to disclose certain estate-related documents that a chambers judge had considered privileged.
A three-justice panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal made a Feb. 3 decision refusing to reconstitute itself as the Divisional Court to address an application for leave to appeal from a Superior Court order interpreting s. 21.1 of Ontario’s Succession Law Reform Act, 1990.
Enjoy this story? Read the latest trusts and estates law news on the main page!
