Ontario Superior Court orders man to vacate family property amid will dispute
The Superior Court ordered Jim to vacate the family property by November 30 and mandated that any unpaid amounts be deducted from his share of the estate.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered a man to vacate a family property due to his failure to meet financial obligations related to a will dispute following his mother's death.
Elena Canale passed away in July 2019, leaving behind four adult children, including Jim Canale and Rosemary Ziccardi. Jim had challenged the validity of his mother's 2005 last will and testament, asserting that a previous will from 2003 should be considered her valid will. Under the 2003 will, the family property would have been bequeathed solely to Jim. The 2005 will, however, named Rosemary as the sole estate trustee and divided the estate, granting Jim eight shares, Rosemary seven shares, and another sister, Rita Conklin, five shares.
Despite his challenge, Jim has been living rent-free on the property since his mother's death, while the estate covered utilities, insurance, and property taxes. In 2022, the court ordered Jim to pay $25,958.36 to cover outstanding property expenses and required him to make monthly payments of $950. Jim failed to meet these obligations, leading to further court proceedings.
In March 2022, Jim was ordered to cover ongoing property expenses and pay off arrears. However, his non-compliance prompted the respondents to bring contempt motions against him. In August 2023, the court found that Jim failed to make the required monthly payments. He was allowed to remedy his breach, but despite making partial payments, Jim remained in arrears as of November 2023. The court concluded that while Jim was not in contempt for remaining on the property after missing payments, his continued non-compliance justified his removal from the property.
The Superior Court ordered Jim to vacate the family property by November 30 and mandated that any unpaid amounts be deducted from his share of the estate. The court also dismissed a motion to list the property for sale, stating that such action did not follow logically from Jim’s non-compliance with financial orders.
