Contesting a will in BC starts with picking the right claim, and each claim has its own deadline

What are the different ways to challenge a will in BC?

BC law offers six main routes: varying the will, challenging its validity, rectifying a drafting error, a claim by someone the will leaves out, such as a caregiver, a dispute over assets moved into joint names, and action against the executor. Each has its own claimants, its own proof, its own deadline and its own first step.

• Wills variation (WESA): brought by a spouse or child of the will-maker; must show the will does not make adequate, just and equitable provision for them; started within 180 days of the grant, then served within a further short period; the first step is a notice of civil claim in the Supreme Court.
• Invalidity: brought by anyone with an interest, such as a beneficiary under an earlier will or an heir on an intestacy; must show lack of capacity, undue influence, or that the signing formalities weren't met; should be raised before the grant where possible; the first step is often a notice of dispute at the probate registry.
• Rectification (WESA): brought by a beneficiary or the executor; must show the will fails to carry out the will-maker's intentions because of an accidental slip, a clerical error or a misunderstood instruction; a deadline runs from the grant; the first step is an application to court.
• Claims by people the will leaves out: brought by caregivers, stepchildren, siblings or others who added to the estate; must show unjust enrichment or reliance on a promise (proprietary estoppel); the Limitation Act's basic period runs from discovery; the first step is a claim against the estate.
• Joint assets: brought by beneficiaries or the executor; must show that an asset put in someone else's name for no payment was meant to stay with the estate, relying on the presumption of resulting trust; the Limitation Act applies; the first step is a written demand, then a claim.
• Executor misconduct: brought by a beneficiary; must show the executor is failing in their duties, conflicted or mismanaging the estate; no fixed deadline while the estate is open; the first step is a request for accounts, then an application to pass accounts, for directions or for removal.

How long do you have to contest a will in BC?

It depends on the claim. A spouse or child seeking to vary a will under WESA must start the action within 180 days of the grant and serve it soon after; the court has no general power to extend that limit. Validity, unjust enrichment and joint asset claims generally fall under the Limitation Act's basic period, running from discovery.

The 180 days run from the date the grant issues in BC, not from the death. If nobody applies for a grant, the clock hasn't started, and a spouse or child can use a citation, a court document requiring the named executor to apply for a grant or step aside. Once the grant issues, the period runs whether or not the claimant has seen the will. The notice of proposed application an executor must deliver to spouses and children is often the first warning.

For a validity challenge, the cleaner course is to act before the grant, with a notice of dispute, so the executor can't obtain a grant on a will you say is invalid. Challenging after the grant is possible but means asking the court to revoke a grant already issued.

Claims outside WESA, such as unjust enrichment, follow the Limitation Act. Its discovery rule starts the period when the claimant knew, or reasonably should have known, they had a claim, which is often the death or the first reading of the will.

How do you prove undue influence or lack of capacity in BC?

Capacity is judged at the moment the will was made: whether the will-maker understood they were making a will, knew roughly what they owned, knew who might expect to benefit, and could weigh those claims. Undue influence means coercion that overpowered their wishes. Evidence comes from medical records, the drafting lawyer's notes and people who saw the will-maker then.

A will that was properly signed after being read over starts with a presumption that the will-maker had capacity and knew what it said. Suspicious circumstances change that: illness or confusion around the signing, a beneficiary who arranged the appointment, or a sharp break from earlier wills. Once they are shown, the person relying on the will has to prove capacity and knowledge and approval.

Undue influence is harder to prove. Persuasion and appeals to affection are allowed; coercion is not. WESA shifts the burden where the challenger shows that a beneficiary was in a position to dominate the will-maker, or that the will-maker depended on them: the beneficiary must then show they did not use that position to get the gift. Children who provided care and new partners who ran the will-maker's affairs are the usual examples.

Evidence is easiest to get early: the drafting lawyer's file, the will-maker's medical chart around the signing, earlier wills, and bank records showing who controlled the money. Records become harder to obtain as time passes.

Can a stepchild, caregiver or sibling make a claim against an estate?

Not a wills variation claim, which in BC is limited to the will-maker's spouse and children, with stepchildren counting only if adopted. A stepchild, caregiver or sibling may still claim in unjust enrichment, if they gave the will-maker work or money without fair return, or in proprietary estoppel, if they relied on a promise to their cost.

Unjust enrichment needs three things: the estate gained from the claimant's work or money, the claimant lost out correspondingly, and there is no good reason for the gain, such as a wage already paid or a gift intended. A daughter who gave up paid work for years to care for a parent, unpaid, on the understanding she would be looked after, is the familiar example. The remedy is usually money, sometimes an interest in property.

Proprietary estoppel needs a promise or assurance about property, reliance on it, and a detriment as a result. A son who worked the family farm or business for low pay because he was told it would be his can fit here. The court decides what is needed to satisfy the claim, which may be less than what was promised.

Where there is no will at all, there is nothing to vary. Disputes then turn on who inherits under WESA, whether someone was still a spouse at the date of death, or who should administer the estate.

How do you stop probate if you think a will is wrong?

File a notice of dispute at the probate registry before the grant issues. While it is in effect, the registry won't issue a grant for the estate, giving you time to raise the concern. A notice of dispute lasts only a limited time, can be renewed, and can be removed by court order if it has no proper basis.

A notice of dispute is a holding step, not a claim. To decide the question itself, someone has to start a proceeding, usually to prove the will in solemn form, where the court rules on validity after hearing evidence. The executor can bring that proceeding as readily as the challenger.

It is the wrong tool for a wills variation claim, which is started after the grant and needs the grant to start its clock. A notice filed without a real basis can lead to an order to pay the other side's costs.

Why do estate disputes start, and can they be prevented?

Most BC estate disputes grow from a short list of causes: unequal gifts with no explanation, assets moved into one child's name before death, loans or gifts nobody recorded, second marriages and blended families, an executor who is also the main beneficiary, and a plan nobody was told about. Each can be reduced by planning while the will-maker is alive.

• Unequal gifts with no explanation: WESA lets the court consider the will-maker's written reasons, so a short, factual explanation kept with the will gives the court something to weigh. The Wills page covers making a will that holds up.
• Assets moved into one child's name: say in writing whether a joint account or a share of the house is a gift or held for the estate. The title transfers page covers adding someone to title.
• Loans and gifts nobody recorded: a signed note saying whether money to a child is a loan, a gift or an advance on their inheritance prevents the argument later.
• Second marriages and blended families: a spouse and children from an earlier relationship each have variation rights. A will and a marriage or cohabitation agreement drafted together narrow the gap; our blended families guide covers the planning.
• An executor who is also the main beneficiary: a neutral co-executor, or regular accounts to the other beneficiaries, takes the suspicion out of the role.
• A plan nobody was told about: a family meeting, or a letter explaining the plan, removes the surprise that so often turns into a claim.