In Kan v. Cheong, 2024 BCSC 1633, Justice Warren presided over a wills variation case brought by Celina Kan, who challenged her father’s will under section 60 of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA). The plaintiff, Celina, was one of three biological daughters of the testator, Tat Kuan Cheong. When Celina was four, she was sent to live with her aunt and uncle in Hong Kong, while her sisters, Ina and Sophia, remained with their father. This early separation led to a distant relationship between Celina and her father.

In his will, Tat Kuan left Celina $10,000 USD, referring to her as his “niece.” Meanwhile, the residue of his estate, worth approximately $730,000 CAD, was to be divided equally between Ina and Sophia. Celina claimed the bequest was inadequate and sought an equal share of the estate’s residue. Initially, Ina and Sophia argued that Celina had no standing to challenge the will, claiming she had been adopted by their aunt and uncle. However, this was later conceded, and Celina was recognized as a “child” under WESA.

The court examined whether the will had made adequate provision for Celina. Justice Warren found that, despite the distant relationship, the breakdown in father-daughter ties was due to Tat Kuan’s decision to relinquish his parental role. The court determined that this did not absolve him of his moral duty to Celina. The $10,000 bequest was deemed inadequate, and there was no valid reason for the significant difference between what Celina and her sisters were left.

The court varied the will to award Celina a one-third share of the residue of the estate, equal to her sisters’ shares.

NOTE: This brief summary is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon for any legal purpose.