Battle Brewing Over Heath Ledger Estate?

Recently departed actor Heath Ledger (A Knight's Tale, Brokeback Mountain, The Dark Knight) left behind a young daughter.  But based on news reports, Ledger appears to have neglected to include his daughter in his Will, perhaps unintentionally.  It appears Ledger last filed a Will in 2003, before the birth of his daughter Matilda in 2005 and before his hit film Brokeback Mountain.  This Will reportedly leaves Heath Ledger's estate entirely to his father, mother and sisters, obviously with nothing to little Matilda.

Heath Ledger's father Kim has stated that little Matilda "will be taken care of".  However, Kim himself has been in litigation with his brothers, who accused him in 1994 of mishandling their grandfather's estate to the extent of $2 million.

This intriguing story also illustrates the importance and difficulty of valuing an estate.  News reports contain estimates from $2.5 million to $20 million, quite a range for an estate that spans at least two countries. 

No word yet on whether litigation will be launched on little Matilda's behalf against her exclusion from her father's estate.  Of course, other Wills may emerge...

Stay tuned.

Chris Graham

 

 

Interim Support - Dependant's Relief

Section 64 of Ontario's Succession Law Reform Act ("SLRA") allows for interim support to a dependant's relief applicant "in need of and entitled to support". 

The language of the section can cause difficulty to applicants due to the need to prove entitlement.  Entitlement is often in issue based on disputed facts, so the Estate Trustee defending an application can argue that only a trial can resolve that question. 

Often dependant's relief applicants have little or no means to support themselves on an ongoing basis, let alone fund litigation.  Denial of interim support to applicants can have serious repercussions on their day-to-day lives and can give the Estate Trustee considerable economic leverage.

Re Puliver (1982), 39 O.R. (2d) (High Court of Justice) described the problem succinctly:


"I must pay heed to the requirement (under section 64) that the applicant be in need of and entitled to support"…


"Such an interpretation would effectively deprive dependants of any interim relief if any question were raised as to entitlement except as to quantum."


Moving on to a solution, Justice Van Camp decided that:

 "where the applicant has put forward substantial evidence to support her claim as a dependant, and that the testator was domiciled in Ontario, application for interim relief should be heard even if [status as a dependant] are in issue on the final hearing of the substantive application."


Re Puliver provided much needed ammunition when arguing for interim support for alleged dependants where entitlement is not admitted by the Estate Trustee.

Thanks for reading.
Sean Graham