Al- Sabah Estate 2016 BCSC 1781 both have a probate revoked and removed the administrator for both failing to disclose important information to the court as well as sending the required probate notice to her close relatives at addresses that were mostly incorrect and could have easily been corrected.
The court held that equity favoured the revocation of grant of letters of administration and followed the decision of Desbiens v Smith Estate 2010 BCCA 394 where a grant of probate was set aside in order to allow a wills variation action brought” out of time”, but the defendants had not received notice of the probate application due to an incorrect address used by the executor who should have been more diligent.
40 Moreover, I am satisfied that, at the time she applied for the grant of letters of administration of the estate, Sheikha Salem failed to disclose to the court pertinent information that ought to have been disclosed.
41 Where the evidence discloses that the person who is obliged to give notice failed to exercise sufficient diligence to ascertain the correct address to which the notice was to be mailed, the notice requirements of the Act are not complied with, and the court has a general discretion to revoke a grant of letters of administration: Desbiens v. Smith Estate 2010 BCCA 394 (B.C. C.A.) at paras. 21 to 35 inclusive. I do note that that decision dealt with the Act’s predecessor, the now-repealed Estate Administration Act, which was replaced by the Act. However, the general principles of law remain applicable.
42 When it is alleged that an administrator should be removed because he or she is not acting in the best interests of the estate, the main factor to be considered is the welfare of the beneficiaries: Veitch v. Veitch Estate, 2007 BCSC 952 (B.C. S.C.) at para. 22
