Estate planning in British Columbia increasingly intersects with informal and digital documents. From handwritten notes to online will templates saved on personal devices, courts are often asked to determine whether imperfect documents should nevertheless be treated as valid wills.

The recent decision of the Supreme Court of B.C. in Peterson (Re) provides important guidance on how courts approach unsigned and incomplete testamentary documents under the curative provisions of the Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA).

This case highlights a critical issue: not every document that looks like a will (or was intended to be one) will be legally recognized as such. The key question is whether the document reflects the deceased’s “fixed and final” testamentary intentions.

The Legal Framework: Section 58 of WESA

Under British Columbia law, a valid will must generally comply with formal requirements, including being signed and witnessed. However, section 58 of WESA allows the court to “cure” deficiencies in a document.

This provision gives the court discretion to recognize a document as a will—even if it does not meet formal requirements—if it represents the deceased’s testamentary intentions.

The central test, developed through case law, asks:

  • Does the document reflect a deliberate or fixed and final expression of the deceased’s intentions regarding the distribution of their estate?
  • Was the document intended to function as a will?

This flexible approach allows courts to prioritize substance over form, but only where the evidence clearly supports doing so.

Deceased Left Behind Several Incomplete, Informal “Wills”

In Peterson (Re), the testator passed away in August 2024, leaving an estate valued at approximately $700,000. She had no spouse or children and was estranged from her only sibling.

No formally valid will was found. Instead, several incomplete and informal documents surfaced:

  • An unsigned, undated printed document titled “Last Will and Testament” (the “Physical Will”)
  • A digital will template saved on her electronic devices (the “Digital Will”)
  • Various notes and draft communications relating to estate planning

Multiple charitable organizations brought competing applications, each arguing that a different document represented the deceased’s final intentions.

The Competing Documents

The Physical Will

The Physical Will was a printed document found among the deceased’s important papers at her home. While incomplete and unsigned, it contained several key features:

  • A clear title: “Last Will and Testament”
  • A specific distribution of the estate:
    • 50% to the Canadian Cancer Society
    • 50% to the Heart and Stroke Foundation
  • A statement excluding her estranged sister
  • Funeral instructions
  • A specific gift (a piano), albeit with some uncertainty

Although the document lacked signatures and witnesses, it resembled a near-complete will in substance.

The Digital Will

The Digital Will was discovered on the deceased’s tablet and laptop as a partially completed online template.

It included:

  • A revocation clause
  • Basic family information
  • A list of three intended charitable beneficiaries

However, it contained a critical flaw: the distribution section assigned “0 shares” of the estate to each beneficiary, leaving the actual division undefined.

Which Document Was Valid?

The court was asked to determine: Which document, if any, represented the deceased’s fixed and final testamentary intentions?

This required not only assessing the content of each document but also examining timing, surrounding circumstances, and evidence of the deceased’s decision-making process.

The Importance of Finality

The court emphasized that not all draft documents qualify under section 58. A document must show a settled intention, not merely ongoing consideration or planning.

The Physical Will conveyed what the court described as an “air of finality”. It provided a complete distribution scheme, addressed family relationships, included funeral wishes, and appeared to be placed with important personal documents. In contrast, the Digital Will lacked essential details and reflected uncertainty.

Timing and Context Matter

A key factor was the timeline of events:

  • The Digital Will was last modified in September 2022
  • The deceased suffered a serious brain injury in October 2022
  • After this event, she took steps suggesting renewed efforts to organize her affairs

The court inferred that the Physical Will was likely created or finalized after the Digital Will, making it the more recent expression of intention.

Incomplete Gifts Signal Uncertainty

One of the most significant issues with the Digital Will was the failure to specify how the estate should be divided.

The court rejected the argument that it could “fill in the gaps” and assume equal distribution among the named charities. Doing so would risk substituting the court’s judgment for the testator’s intentions.

Instead, the absence of clear instructions was treated as evidence that the deceased had not yet finalized her decisions.

Evidence of Ongoing Deliberation

The court also considered draft emails to a lawyer about preparing a will, research into estate planning, and multiple incomplete documents. These factors suggested that, at least at the time of the Digital Will, the deceased was still in the planning stage.

By contrast, the Physical Will appeared to reflect a later, more settled position.

Physical Will Declared Valid Under WESA

The Supreme Court of British Columbia concluded that:

  • The Physical Will represented the deceased’s fixed and final testamentary intentions
  • It should be recognized as her valid will under section 58 of WESA
  • The Digital Will did not meet the required standard of finality

As a result, 50% of the estate was to be distributed to the Heart and Stroke Foundation, with the other 50% going to the Canadian Cancer Society. The application relying on the Digital Will was dismissed.

Lessons for Estate Planning in B.C.

Informal Documents Can Be Valid—But Not Always

Section 58 offers flexibility, but it is not a safety net for incomplete or ambiguous planning. Courts require clear evidence of final intent.

“Draft” Does Not Mean “Final”

Even a well-structured digital will may fail if key terms are missing, the document appears unfinished, or the testator was still considering alternatives.

Specificity Is Critical

A will must clearly address:

  • Who receives the estate
  • In what proportions
  • Any exclusions or special provisions

Uncertainty in these areas can render the document invalid.

Context Will Be Scrutinized

Courts will look beyond the document itself, including the timing of its creation, relevant medical events, the testator’s communications and surrounding conduct, and the placement and storage of their documents.

Professional Estate Planning Remains Essential

This case underscores the risks of relying on online templates, draft documents, and unexecuted plans. Properly executed wills remain the most reliable way to ensure that your wishes are carried out.

Protect Your Estate Plan with Experienced Guidance From CM Lawyers in Vernon, Salmon Arm and Enderby

Unclear or incomplete wills can create costly disputes and uncertainty for your loved ones. If you are relying on a draft will, an online template, or an outdated estate plan, it is essential to ensure your intentions are properly documented and legally enforceable.

At CM Lawyers, our knowledgeable estate litigation and estate planning lawyers assist clients with drafting legally valid wills and estate plans, resolving disputes over informal or contested wills, and protecting charitable and family interests in estate litigation.

To schedule a confidential consultation, please contact our team online or call our Vernon office at (250) 308-0338, our Salmon Arm office at (250) 803-9171, or our Enderby office at (778) 443-5065.