Spousal support is an amount of money one spouse has a duty to pay to the other spouse. In addition to whether a party receives spousal support at all, other considerations include what the amount of the spousal support should be and how it will be paid.

Are you entitled to spousal support?

A spouse is entitled to spousal support where the parties agree or the court determines one spouse is entitled to spousal support.

The court must consider the following objectives when determining whether a spouse is entitled to spousal support:

(a)to recognize any economic advantages or disadvantages to the spouses arising from the relationship between the spouses or the breakdown of that relationship;

(b)to apportion between the spouses any financial consequences arising from the care of their child, beyond the duty to provide support for the child;

(c)to relieve any economic hardship of the spouses arising from the breakdown of the relationship between the spouses;

(d)as far as practicable, to promote the economic self-sufficiency of each spouse within a reasonable period of time.

How is the amount and duration of spousal support calculated?

Once it is determined a spouse is entitled to spousal support, the amount and duration of the spousal support must then be determined. The court will consider the conditions, means, needs, and other circumstances of each spouse. This includes considering:

(a)the length of time the spouses lived together;

(b)the functions performed by each spouse during the period they lived together;

(c)an agreement between the spouses, or an order, relating to the support of either spouse.

The court has the discretion to impute income to one or both spouses. This means that when the court calculates spousal support, they will use an income amount that is greater than the amount the spouse makes. This may occur for various reasons, including where one spouse is intentionally under-employed or intentionally unemployed.

The court also has the discretion to award spousal support as either ongoing payments or a lump sum. In Parton v Parton, 2018 BCCA 273, the British Columbia Court of Appeal stated the court will weigh the advantages and disadvantages of either type of payment. Advantages of a lump sum payment may include that it can help the spouses end contact with each other, if they would prefer to limit or end all communication.  One disadvantage of a lump sum payment may be that the circumstances of one party change after the amount of the lump sum payment is determined. This might include one party later having greater or fewer needs than they did when the amount was calculated, and thus requiring more spousal support.

Conclusion

Once it is determined a spouse is entitled to spousal support, other steps in this process will include determining how much spousal support will be received and for exactly how long. The court may impute income to a spouse or award a lump sum payment, rather than ongoing payments. To learn about whether you may be entitled to spousal support, contact one of our Family Lawyers today.

The post How is Spousal Support Determined in BC? appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

The BC Supreme Court recently addressed these questions in the case of Derencinovic v. 7 West Homes Ltd., 2021 BCSC 1481.

In Derencinovic, two friends went into business together to purchase plots of land and develop high-end luxury homes for resale. While one friend (Paul) was responsible for the day-to-day operation of the business, the other friend (John) acted as the “banker” and loaned money to the business for each new project.

As the friends embarked on their fourth home project, John had concerns that the money he was investing was being diverted out of the company without his approval. He wanted to ensure that he would be repaid in full for all the money he loaned to the business for each new project. In order to do so, John and Paul signed a mortgage agreement which granted John an interest in the fourth project property to the extent of about $1.3 million.

After the fourth project was completed and the new home was sold, Paul tried to argue that the mortgage was invalid because, among other reasons, no money was advanced at the time the mortgage agreement was signed.

The Court found that advancement of money under the mortgage is not a requirement and that securing prior advances is a proper use of a mortgage agreement. If there is a discrepancy between the amount of money the lender has provided to the borrower and the face amount of the mortgage, then the Court will look to the intentions of the parties and will strive to give effect to those intentions.

“If advances have actually been made, then the inquiry ends and the mortgagee is entitled to the benefits of the mortgage. On the other hand, if all of the monies have not been advanced, then the court is to proceed to the next step and attempt to ascertain the intention of the parties. If the intention was to benefit the mortgagee, even absent actual advances, then effect should be given to that intention.”

In Derencinovic, the Court relied heavily on the mortgage agreement as evidence of the parties’ intention that John was entitled to be repaid $1.3 million. The terms of the agreement were clear and both parties received independent legal advice before signing the mortgage. In the end, the mortgage agreement was found to be valid and John was entitled to recover the sale proceeds of the company’s fourth project in partial satisfaction of the debt owing to him. This case highlights how legal arrangements can be used in creative ways to secure and enforce a person’s or a company’s rights. If you or your company are navigating a complex legal issue or need advice on crafting advantageous legal arrangements, contact our experienced corporate and commercial lawyers for a consultation and find out how we can help.

The post Can a Mortgage Secure Funds that Have Been Previously Advanced to a Borrower? appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

Per s. 81 of the Family Law Act, unless there is a legally binding agreement or court order that indicates otherwise, the value of all family property, (with the exception of excluded property, discussed below), and debt is presumed to be divided equally between both spouses or common-law partners upon separation.  This is true regardless of how much each party contributed to that property or debt, which means that, even if the property or debt is exclusively in one spouse’s name, or was purchased or incurred exclusively by one spouse, the other spouse could be responsible for, or entitled to half of the value of, that debt or property upon separation.

When people see the word “property”, they often think exclusively of houses or apartments. However, it is important to be aware that family property consists of much more than that, and will include things like:

• Your family home, and any other property one or both of you has any interest in, domestically or even internationally
• Vehicles
• Bank accounts
• RRSPs
• Pensions
• Insurance policies
• Investments
• Interest in a business
• Vacation properties and
• Any money or property owing to one of the spouses.

Despite this rule, there are a number of types of property the Family Law Act deems to be excluded and therefore not subject to this rule requiring the equal division of family property. Per s. 85 of the Family Law Act, the following types of property can be excluded from equal division, and kept exclusively by the spouse they belong to:

1. Property acquired by one of the spouses before their relationship began
2. Inheritances received by one spouse
3. Gifts given to one spouse in certain circumstances
4. Certain types of settlements or awards of damages provided to a spouse as compensation for injury or loss that spouse suffered and
5. Money paid to one spouse under an insurance policy in specific circumstances.

Importantly, while the Family Law Act does indicate that these types of property can be excluded, they will not automatically be excluded. Instead, the spouse who wants to claim that certain property is or ought to be excluded property has the responsibility of proving that the property in question falls under one of these above categories, which requires evidence. Further, while it might seem as though certain property will fall into one of these types of excluded property at first glance, things are often not this straightforward. For example, while some personal injury settlements will be excluded from division, any part of the settlement designed to compensate for a loss of income of a spouse will not be excluded. As a result, it is important to consult a family lawyer when questions about excluded property begin to arise so that they can help you to ensure your rights are being protected. 

Significantly, as mentioned above, these general rules pertaining to property division apply only where there is no valid, enforceable contract or marriage agreement in place indicating that you and your spouse want your property to be divided some other way. In light of this, if both you and your partner agree that you would like to have your property divided differently than the Family Law Act would divide it, it is important that you contact a family lawyer to help you draft an enforceable marriage contract so that you can ensure your wishes with respect to how you both wish to see your property divided will be respected. 

Have a question about how to divide property? Contact us to set up a consultation.

The post How is Shared Property Divided in Divorce? appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

When an insurance company falls short and a court finds that it acted in bad faith, such rulings damage the insurance company’s reputation. It undermines the working relationships with brokers and between consumers of their products.

In Fidler v. Sunlife Assurance Company of Canada (2006), the Supreme Court of Canada clarified that bad faith requires a conscious wrongdoing or “an act of dishonesty operating within an improper or illegal design.” It is important to point out that negligent adjusting of a file does not necessarily lead to a finding of bad faith. However, handling claims incompetently, with no compassion, or behavior that is high-handed or outrageously arrogant or designed to “beat down” the insured may be considered acts of bad faith.

There have been many cases since the Fidler decision that have continued to refine what constitutes bad faith in Canada. However, these cases, even taken as a body of law, do not provide a clearly drawn blueprint of how to establish claims against insurance companies for bad faith. Ultimately, such findings will be established on the unique facts and circumstances of the case before the court.  As set out in Fidler: a court considering whether the duty has been breached must look at the conduct of the insurer throughout the claims process to determine whether considering the circumstances, as they then existed, the insurer acted fairly and promptly in responding to the claim.

If an insurer has acted in bad faith, they should expect to be taken to task. However, if you allege bad faith against an insurance company you must be ready for battle as insurers take such allegations very seriously. If the allegations are proven in court, bad faith awards serve to caution insurance companies from behaving in such ways. If you believe your insurance company has acted in bad faith, contact a lawyer experienced in such cases to determine whether the facts of your case support pursuing a claim in bad faith.

Do you feel your insurer has acted in bad faith? Contact us for a free initial consultation and find out how we can help.

The post Has your Insurer acted in Bad Faith? appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

All reporting bodies that held a registered interest in land prior to November 30, 2020, must file a report in accordance with the Registry’s requirements by November 30, 2022, unless the interest in land will be transferred to another entity prior to that date. There are significant fines for failure to comply with these requirements, so if you believe they apply to you please contact McQuarrie at LOTR@mcquarrie.com.

Is this different from the requirement to create a transparency register for my corporation?

Yes, the requirement under the Land Owner Transparency Act, SBC 2019, c 23 that a corporation that owns an interest in land must file a transparency report is separate from the requirement under the Business Corporations Act, SBC 2002, c 57 that a corporation must maintain a transparency registry. Corporations must comply with both requirements, as applicable.

What is the Land Owner Transparency Registry?

The Registry is a publicly searchable database that collects information prescribed by the Land Owner Transparency Act (the “Act”) about the ownership of land within British Columbia. The Act requires reporting bodies to file “transparency reports” that disclose information about both the reporting bodies themselves, and the reporting bodies’ “interest holders” (the people who benefit from an interest in land held by a reporting body). The purpose of the Registry is to prevent money laundering by creating transparency as to who benefits from land owned by corporations, trusts, and partnerships in British Columbia.

What is a “reporting body”?

The definition of reporting body includes all corporations, trusts, and partnerships that hold an interest in land in British Columbia, subject to certain exclusions provided for by the Act.

What constitutes an “interest in land”?

The definition of an “interest in land” includes not only registered ownership of a parcel of land in British Columbia or the right under a contract to require the transfer of such ownership, but also a life estate in land, and a lease of land that has a term of more than ten (10) years.

Who is an “interest holder”?

There are three primary types of interest holders:

1. In respect of a relevant corporation, individuals with registered or beneficial ownership of 10% or more of the total outstanding shares (or 10% or more of the outstanding voting shares) of that corporation are interest holders. Individuals who indirectly control 10% or more of the total outstanding shares, or 10% or more of the voting shares, of a corporation through another entity (such as a corporation or a trust) are also interest holders;
2. In respect of a relevant partnership, all the partners in the partnership are interest holders, and in the case of a corporation that is a partner, that corporation’s interest holders are also considered interest holders of the partnership; and
3. In respect of a relevant trust, the beneficial owners, or beneficiaries, are interest holders, and where a corporation is the beneficiary of a trust its interest holders are also considered interest holders of the trust.

There are some exceptions to the general rules provided above, and several more complex ways to become an interest holder in a reporting body. If you are uncertain how the reporting requirements apply to you or a reporting body you have an interest in, please contact McQuarrie at LOTR@mcquarrie.com.

When is a Land Owner Transparency Registry filing required?

A filing with the Registry is required in two circumstances. First, a “transparency declaration” must be filed any time an interest in land is registered in the Land Title Office; transparency declarations disclose whether the recipient of the interest in land is a reporting body or not. If the recipient is a reporting body, a transparency report must also be filed.

The second circumstance arises if a reporting body acquired an interest in land prior to November 30, 2020 and will continue to hold that interest past November 30, 2022. All reporting bodies that hold such an interest in land must file a transparency report prior to November 30, 2022.

What should you do?

If you believe these requirements apply to you or a reporting body you have an interest in, you should contact McQuarrie at LOTR@mcquarrie.com as soon as possible. There are significant fines for failure to make the applicable filings with the Registry. Fines for individuals are up to $25,000 or 15% of the assessed value of the property to which the filings relate, whichever is greater. For entities other than individuals (for example corporations or partnerships) that fail to make the required filings, the fine can be up to $50,000 or 15% of the assessed value of the property to which the filings relate, again whichever is greater.

Transparency declarations and transparency reports must be certified and filed by legal professionals, through the Land Title Survey Authority. McQuarrie is happy to assist you with determining the scope of your obligation to make filings, collecting the information relevant to the filings, and preparing the filings. We can also make the filings on your behalf. For more information, please contact us at LOTR@mcquarrie.com.

The post The Requirements of The Land Owner Transparency Act and The Steps Necessary to Comply with Them appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

The new transparency register requirements are legally mandated for all B.C. private companies. Therefore, companies will need to contact their shareholders to gather information about their ownership in order to prepare their transparency registers.

A basic understanding of how the transparency register requirements work and how one can determine whether an individual is a significant individual will assist companies to comply with these new transparency requirements.

Who is a Significant Individual?

The transparency register must list all significant individuals of the company. A significant individual is defined as an individual who has:

• legal or beneficial ownership of 25% or more of the:
  • issued shares of the company; or
  • voting shares of the company;
• indirect control of an intermediary[1] or a person that holds 25% or more of the:
  • issued shares of the company; or
  • voting shares of the company;
• any of the following direct or indirect rights or abilities:
  • the right to elect, appoint or remove a majority of the directors of the company;
  • indirect control of the right to elect, appoint or remove a majority of the directors of the company;
• direct and significant influence over an individual with the right or ability to elect, appoint or remove a majority of the directors; or
• any combination of the foregoing.

 Interests or Rights Held Jointly

When two or more individuals jointly own one of the above interests or rights, then all those individuals are considered to be significant individuals and must be listed in the transparency register.

Interests or Rights Exercised in Concert

Also, groups of individuals who are acting in concert must add their interests together. If the group’s combined interests or rights meet the requirements to be a significant individual, then the company must list every member of the group in its transparency register, as all individuals in the group are considered to be significant individuals.

Further, individuals who have the following relationships with each other must also be included on the transparency register if their combined interests or rights meet the requirements to be a significant individual:

• spouses;
• parents and children; or
• relatives who have the same house.

To assist companies in identifying significant individuals we have created a worksheet for you to download.

[wpdm_package id=’12350′]

What information will be included in the transparency register?

The transparency register must contain the following information for each significant individual:

• full legal name, date of birth and last known address[2];
• whether or not the individual is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident of Canada;
• if the individual is not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident of Canada, every country or state of which the individual is a citizen;
• whether or not the individual is a resident in Canada for the purposes of the Income Tax Act (Canada);
• the date on which the individual became or ceased to be a signficiant individual in respect of the company; and
• a description of how the individual is a significant individual.

In addition, transparency registers also track steps taken to obtain information from significant individuals.

Do you have to notify an individual once it is determined that they are a significant individual?

A private company must, within 10 days after indicating in its transparency register that an individual:

• is a significant individual in respect of the company; or
• has ceased to be a significant individual in respect of the company,

send a notice to that individual that sets out this fact and the prescribed information, if any.

Do shareholders have any obligations to provide information in respect of a transparency register of a company?

A private company may, at any time, send to a shareholder of the company a request to provide information for the purposes of maintaining its transparency register. After receiving such a request, a shareholder must, after taking reasonable steps to compile the requested information, promptly send to the private company the information that the shareholder was able to compile in respect of the transparency register.

What are the requirements for newly incorporated companies?

Effective October 1, 2020, newly incorporated B.C. private companies will need to establish a transparency register upon incorporation.

Who prepares the transparency register for my company?

If McQuarrie is the registered and records office for your company, then we have prepared a draft transparency register for you. Please follow the instructions we have enclosed.

If McQuarrie is not the registered and records office for your company, you may engage us to help your company comply with this mandatory requirement. As such, please email us at transparency@mcquarrie.com with the following subject line: “McQ Is Not R&R: Need Assistance with the Transparency Register”.

Who will have access to the transparency register?

Only current directors of the company, law enforcement and specific inspecting officials will have access to the transparency register, subject to certain rules. This means that the general public will not have access to the transparency register.

Where will the transparency register be located?

Generally, the transparency register must be held in each company’s own records office alongside its other corporate records. It is not filed with any government (or other publicly accessible) registry.

Will I need to maintain and update the transparency register?

Yes, companies must keep their transparency registers up-to-date and must update their transparency register within 30 days of becoming aware of any new or different information.

In addition, a private company must perform an annual review of the transparency register and take reasonable steps to confirm that the required information is accurate, complete, and up-to-date.

What if I don’t comply with the new transparency requirements?

Non-compliance with the new transparency requirements is an offence subject to possible fines of up to $50,000 for individuals and $100,000 for other persons.

What if I still have some questions?

We are here to help! If you have any questions or require assistance please email us at transparency@mcquarrie.com

 Please note that in order to accurately identify and describe significant individuals you may need legal advice. If that is the case, additional legal fees may apply.

Additional resources:

[wpdm_package id=’12348′]

The B.C. Registrar of Companies has also provided some useful guidance with respect to the transparency register.

We trust that this guide will help your private company (or companies) navigate the changing landscape of doing business in British Columbia.

[1] Intermediary means a corporation, partnership, agent, trustee or personal or other legal representatives. A chain of intermediaries, in relation to a private company, is a group of 2 or more intermediaries having a hierarchal relationship to each other in which each intermediary in the chain controls the intermediary below it, and the last intermediary in the chain (i) is the registered owner of one or more of the shares of the private company, or (ii) has the right to elect, appoint or remove one or more of the directors of the private company.

[2] According to the B.C. Registrar of Companies, individuals can list their business address as opposed to their home address on the transparency register as long as it is an address where the individual can be reached when required.

The post The Company Owner’s Guide to B.C.’s New Transparency Register Requirements appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

In a recent decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, Manos v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp., 2020 ONCA, the Court considered the appellant’s argument that the trial judge provided inadequate reasons because he did not explicitly consider the medical evidence of the appellant’s witnesses regarding whether the respondent was suffering from a condition called reactive airways disorder syndrome (“RADS”).

Reaching back to the Supreme Court of Canada decision F.H. v. McDougall, 2008 SCC 53, the Court held that proper reasons serve to:

• Justify and explain the result;
• Tell the losing party why he or she lost;
• Provide for informed consideration of the grounds of appeal; and
• Satisfy the public that justice has been done.

According to the Court, for purposes of appellate intervention, the overarching principle is whether the reasons permit meaningful and effective appellate review. In this particular case, the Court found the trial judge’s reasons were insufficient because:

• There was no analysis of the evidence of the appellant’s experts who testified that the respondent did not suffer from RADS;
• The judge relied on an incorrect summary of the specialists’ views;
• One of the experts relied on was not qualified to give an opinion on the RADS diagnosis;
• The judge’s reasons did not demonstrate why he rejected evidence;
• The rejection of evidence had to be rooted in the evidence before the judge, otherwise the reasons would not be reasonably intelligible to the parties or amenable to meaningful appellate review; and
• The judge did not engage on the issue of causation which was critical and as a result the appellate court could not review the judge’s reasoning process.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal has also recently considered the issue of inadequacy of reasons in Chahal v. Chahal, 2020 BCCA 147. The Court pointed out that while the judge’s reasons were not extensive, she clearly described the issue and the parties’ positions. Importantly, the Court stated that, “it must be remembered that reasons do not need to be extensive; they need not dot every “i” and cross every “t”. Reasons are sufficient if they are responsive to the live issues and the parties’ key arguments”.

As trial counsel, it is imperative that you assist the judge by clearly presenting and connecting admissible evidence to:

• Conclusions you want the Court to draw;
• Inferences you say the Court should and can make; and
• An analysis of why you say certain evidence should be preferred over other evidence.

While it can be frustrating to receive a judge’s reasons that do not appear to address all of your concerns; trial counsel should do its part to lay a clear evidentiary record that can be reviewed by an appellate court.  There is a difference between reasons that you are not satisfied with compared to inadequate reasons. Application of the framework noted above is a useful guide and starting point.

The post Demystifying Judges’ Reasons appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

In brief, the purchase and sale agreement contained a condition requiring the purchaser to obtain a development permit from the city by a particular date. The city did not grant the development permit. The purchaser appealed the city’s decision, but on the evening before the appeal hearing it withdrew its appeal and terminated the agreement. The vendor sued the purchaser.

Following trial, the judge found that the condition contained in the agreement contemplated an appeal and not just the initial application to the city. As a result, the purchaser breached this condition. Further, the judge found that the purchaser had breached its duty of good faith in contractual performance.

On appeal, the Court considered:

• The interpretation of the condition requiring an appeal;
• The duty of honest performance;
• The weighing of expert opinions;
• The loss of chance;
• Mitigation of loss; and
• Forfeiture of the deposit.

Below is a summary of some of the Alberta Court of Appeal’s findings:

Contractual Interpretation

The Alberta Court of Appeal summarized a number of principles when interpreting commercial contracts, such as:

• it is an error of law to fail to consider the surrounding circumstances or factual matrix of a contract;
• surrounding circumstances consist of objective evidence of the background facts at the time of the execution of the contract – knowledge that was or reasonably ought to have been within the knowledge of both parties at or before the date of contracting; and
• commercial contracts must be interpreted in accordance with sound commercial principles and good business sense.

The Duty of Honest Performance

• this duty does not require that a contracting party act to serve the interests of the contracting partner;
• it requires that a party not undermine the interests of the contracting party in bad faith;
• at a minimum, acting in good faith in relation to contractual dealings means being honest, reasonable, candid and forthright.

Expert Opinions

• admission or rejection of expert evidence is owed deference;
• where a trial judge is presented with competing expert opinions, there is no reversible error when the judge makes a reasoned choice between the two;
• there is no principle in law that the expert with the best qualifications must, or even should, be accepted; and
• expert qualifications are but one factor a trial judge must consider.

Loss of Chance

• this concept provides that where performance of the contract may, apart from the wrongdoer’s breach, have been prevented by some other intervening factor, courts apply a discount to the calculation of damages;
• this principle separates the question of causation from the question of loss;
• the burden rests on the plaintiff alleging the breach of contract to prove that the breach and not some other intervening factor has caused its loss;
• the proof of the loss of a mere chance is not enough;
• the plaintiff is entitled to compensation when it shows that the chance lost was sufficiently real and significant to rise above mere speculation.

Mitigation

• Damages for breach of contract in sale of land cases are usually assessed at the date of breach unless there are special circumstances that make assessment at that date inappropriate; and
• Unless damages are assessed at the date of breach, damages would be reduced or inflated based on the luck of the draw.

Deposit

As mentioned in an earlier post, there has been some uncertainty as to whether the deposit should be treated as part payment and credited toward damages, or whether it should be retained in addition to the damages. The Alberta Court of Appeal found that the amount of the deposit ought to be credited toward the damages award. This is consistent with British Columbia in Albrechtsen v. Panaich, 2017 BCSC 1361 and with Ontario in Azzarell v. Shawqui, 2019 ONCA 820.

The post Commercial Contracts and Failed Real Estate Transactions appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.

“People often say they have ‘peace of mind’ after they execute estate planning documents, but too often after a person passes away, we know that was a false sense of security,” explains Elyssa Lockhart, a partner at McQuarrie and an expert in corporate succession and wealth preservation. “If a Will is drafted based on your instructions, but without ample time spent discussing your assets and liabilities, shareholder agreements, family law agreements, and your broad intentions and objectives – your advisor won’t have enough information to determine whether your estate plan poses unanticipated risks.” These risks might include unnecessary tax consequences, increased likelihood of litigation, or even gifts going to the wrong beneficiaries.

Estate Planning and Wealth Management

You can’t take it with you, but how you choose to distribute it involves crucial decisions. Make sure that your bankers, investment planners, insurance and legal professionals are all willing to talk with one another. How an asset is acquired, held, reported for tax purposes, and designated to beneficiaries will impact your Will.

“I am often asked about the wisest way to transfer wealth,” Lockhart continues. “This depends on several factors, not the least of which include a variety of provincial and federal laws, the structure of assets at the moment, family composition, and of course – the intended outcome following death. The best guarantee of successful wealth transition is to have your advisors discuss your goals openly, cover areas of professional overlap and identify issues of field-specific concern before making recommendations from only one perspective.”

Don’t be Penny Wise and Pound Foolish

B.C. differs from other Canadian jurisdictions in how we are required to treat our spouses and children in the distribution of assets when we die. Lockhart has seen any number of inadvisable ‘self-help’ solutions to the perceived risk of a Will being modified in our Courts. Other self-help solutions stem from inaccurate beliefs about how assets are taxed when we die, or about who will receive assets if our primary beneficiary dies before we do. In most cases, these self-help solutions actually create considerable tax, asset transfer and registration, legal and accounting or even litigation fees after death – all easily avoidable if an experienced estate planning lawyer had been consulted at the start.

“When it comes to my clients and the assets they typically hold, we often include multiple wills,” says Lockhart. A Corporate Will allows for more privacy, offers cost savings in the administration process and most importantly, helps to speed the process and ensure continuous control over corporate assets. “We also see an increased call for alter ego trusts and mutual wills, setting out protections for all parties in a blended family by ensuring surviving spouses aren’t left without support, but don’t later disinherit children from a first marriage, either intentionally or inadvertently.”

“As planning advisors, we prefer to look at what a client has already structured and offer suggestions if we see room for improvement, based on their stated objectives. We don’t work transactionally, taking instructions without offering advice“, Lockhart confirms. Lockhart’s practice often involves a SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats). She points out that you don’t necessarily need to make big changes to your structure or your plan, but you should have true peace of mind.

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, Lockhart and her team were already conducting client interviews via secure video-conferencing. McQuarrie’s practice is B.C. based and their experienced legal team is able to work effectively with clients throughout the Province.

Don’t wait until it is too late. Speak to a trusted advisor at McQuarrie today.

The post Preserve Your Wealth and Maximize Your Legacy appeared first on McQuarrie Legal Services.