Published
Sundeep S. Grewal is a lawyer at Lawgical Law Corporation, called to the BC bar in 2018, and a member of the Law Society of British Columbia.
Updated November 12, 2026: the court decisions cited below checked that day.
Wide range: BC courts have moved claimants from nothing or a token gift to 30%, 50%, or the whole estate.
What drives it: the will-maker’s reasons, the relationship, contributions, gifts outside the will, need, and who else benefits.
Every case turns on its facts. These results show the range, not a promise.
The lawyers who handle these estate files
About our lawyers
Sundeep S. Grewal founded Lawgical Law Corporation and practises probate, estate litigation and immigration. He has represented clients in the Provincial and Supreme Courts of British Columbia, from chambers applications to contested trials.
Pardeep S. Grewal is a probate, estates and immigration lawyer known for clear communication and practical strategy.
People considering a wills variation claim usually want to know one thing: what might the court actually do? There’s no formula, but published BC decisions show the range. Children who received a token gift have been awarded half the estate; children cut out in favour of a sibling have been given equal shares; a caregiving daughter has received a whole house; and a spouse in need has received the whole estate. Other wills have been upheld, where there was a long estrangement that wasn’t the parent’s fault, or where the claimant had already received large gifts during the parent’s life. The tables below summarize outcomes from cases discussed in the CLE estate litigation manual. Each turned on its own facts, and your result depends on yours, but they show how BC courts approach these claims.
Lawgical Law Corporation, a probate and estate litigation law firm with offices in Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC, acts on wills variation claims, including on contingency in suitable cases; this guide is by Sundeep S. Grewal.
Leave your details and our team will contact you to arrange a time with a lawyer. Or call (778) 598-3785.
Thank you, we have your request
A member of our team will contact you to arrange a time. If your matter is urgent, call us at (778) 598-3785, Monday to Friday, 9:00 am – 5:00 pm.
Claims by adult children
| Situation | Result | Case |
|---|---|---|
| $1,000 to each child, $1 million to a church; irrational reasons | Children shared 50% | Flurry v. Fuller, 2002 BCSC 1571 |
| Son disinherited in favour of neighbours | Son received 50% | Moore v. Drummond, 2013 BCSC 1762 |
| Daughter left 1%; short estrangement partly caused by the parent | Increased to 50% | Enns v. Gordon Estate, 2018 BCSC 705 |
| Two siblings abandoned twice by their father | 70% of the residue | Jung v. Poole Estate, 2021 BCSC 623 |
| Two of three children cut out; invalid reasons | Equal three-way split | Sharma v. Sharma Estate, 2016 BCSC 1397 |
| Sons’ residue shares of 25% each; parent unable to appreciate his duties | Increased to 40% each | Lamperstorfer v. Plett, 2018 BCSC 89 |
| Son disinherited partly over fear he’d waste the estate | Son received 40% | Bronson v. Peers, 1996 BCSC |
| Daughter with periods of estrangement and reconciliation | 30% of the estate | Pascuzzi v. Pascuzzi, 2022 BCSC 907 |
| Daughter who contributed financially to the house and supported her mother | The whole house | Wilcox v. Wilcox, 2000 BCCA 491 |
| Lifetime gifts to a son reflecting a preference for sons | Daughter received the bulk of the estate | Lam v. Law Estate, 2024 BCSC 1561 |
| Son given only a life interest because of his sexual orientation | Converted to an outright gift | Peden v. Peden Estate, 2006 BCSC 1713 |
Claims involving spouses
| Situation | Result | Case |
|---|---|---|
| Everything to a common-law wife of 2 years; adopted son with no contact since age 7 | Son received half | Pattie v. Standal Estate, 1997 BCSC |
| Common-law spouse of 21 years who gave up her career and cared for the will-maker | Lump sum award | Picketts v. Hall Estate, 2009 BCCA 329 |
| Short marriage; adult child left out and in extreme need; modest estate | Child received the whole estate | Hagen-Bourgeault v. Martens, 2016 BCSC 1096 |
| Second spouse in poor health and of modest means | Spouse received the whole estate | Wong v. Chong Estate, 2016 BCSC 953 |
| Long-term spouse, large estate, no need | Half the family property | Ciarniello v. James, 2016 BCSC 1699 |
Wills upheld
| Situation | Case |
|---|---|
| Daughter who had contacted her mother only sporadically for years | Bell v. Roy Estate, 1993 BCCA |
| Son who became violent toward his parents and cut off contact | Kelly v. Baker, 1996 BCCA |
| 17-year estrangement | Brown v. Pearce, 2014 BCSC 1402 |
| Son had received 51% of the parent’s assets during life | Peterson v. Welwood, 2018 BCSC 1379 |
| First family received insurance outside the will; long second marriage | Sim v. Sim Estate, 2016 BCSC 1222 |
What drives the result
- Whether the will-maker’s reasons were true and logically connected to the will.
- The relationship, and who was responsible for any estrangement.
- Contributions and care.
- Gifts and assets passing outside the will.
- Each party’s needs, including disability.
- Who the other beneficiaries are: family the law protects, or people it doesn’t.
Mistakes I have seen
- Expecting an exact percentage from a case with different facts.
- Assuming a will can’t be changed because one case was upheld.
- Waiting to “see what the estate is worth” until the 180 days pass.
Frequently asked questions
What share would I get?
It depends on your facts, the estate’s size and the other claims. At a first meeting we can compare your situation with decided cases.
Do most cases go to trial?
No. Most settle, often at mediation, informed by what courts have done in similar cases.
Can I bring a claim without paying up front?
Yes. We take suitable wills variation claims on contingency.
What should I do right now?
Note the grant date and gather the will, and a list of what each family member received during the will-maker’s life.
We take suitable wills variation claims and will challenges on contingency, so you don’t need savings to bring one. See how to pay for a will challenge.
Book a consultation with our estate litigation lawyers in Surrey, Abbotsford or Vancouver. See also wills variation claims.
Ready to book? Open the booking form ↑
Sources
- All decisions above as discussed in CLE BC, Estate Disputes in British Columbia: A Litigator’s Guide, §§10.4, 10.55, 10.57, 10.60, 10.71, 10.73, 10.74: Flurry v. Fuller, 2002 BCSC 1571, 2004 BCCA 218; Moore v. Drummond, 2013 BCSC 1762; Enns v. Gordon Estate, 2018 BCSC 705; Jung v. Poole Estate, 2021 BCSC 623; Sharma v. Sharma Estate, 2016 BCSC 1397; Lamperstorfer v. Plett, 2018 BCSC 89; Bronson v. Peers, 1996 CanLII 334 (BC SC); Pascuzzi v. Pascuzzi, 2022 BCSC 907, 2023 BCCA 131; Wilcox v. Wilcox, 2000 BCCA 491; Lam v. Law Estate, 2024 BCSC 1561; Peden v. Peden Estate, 2006 BCSC 1713; Pattie v. Standal Estate, 1997 CanLII 2503 (BC SC); Picketts v. Hall Estate, 2009 BCCA 329; Hagen-Bourgeault v. Martens, 2016 BCSC 1096; Wong v. Chong Estate, 2016 BCSC 953; Ciarniello v. James, 2016 BCSC 1699; Bell v. Roy Estate, 1993 CanLII 1262 (BC CA); Kelly v. Baker, 1996 CanLII 1596 (BC CA); Brown v. Pearce, 2014 BCSC 1402; Peterson v. Welwood, 2018 BCSC 1379; Sim v. Sim Estate, 2016 BCSC 1222
This article is general information about BC law, not legal advice for your situation.