The Default Rule: Witnessed Signing Is Required

BC does not recognize unwitnessed holograph wills simply because they are handwritten and signed. To be valid under WESA, a will must be in writing, signed by the will‑maker (or someone else signing in the will‑maker’s presence and at their direction), and signed by two witnesses who are present at the same time and observe the will‑maker sign. A handwritten will can be valid in BC, but only if these execution steps are met. As a practical safeguard, witnesses should not be beneficiaries or the spouses of beneficiaries, as gifts to them may be void.

When the Court Can “Cure” an Informal Document

If a handwritten note or other informal record does not meet the technical signing requirements, the Supreme Court of British Columbia can sometimes “cure” the defect. WESA allows the court to declare a “record, document or writing” fully effective as a will—or as a revocation, revival, or alteration—if satisfied that it represents the will‑maker’s genuine, fixed and final intention about what should happen on death. Judges look at the wording of the document and the surrounding evidence. Draft-like notes, reminders, or lists are less likely to be treated as a final will than a document that clearly reads as settled instructions.

Why Handwritten Documents Often Lead to Disputes

Even with the court’s curing power, outcomes are discretionary and evidence‑driven, which can mean delay and expense. Handwritten notes frequently contain ambiguities (unclear beneficiaries, assets not fully addressed, or no “residue” clause), and they often omit important appointments such as an executor. Informal documents are also more vulnerable to challenges about mental capacity, undue influence, or whether the writer truly intended the note to operate as a will.

Common Situations and the Bottom Line

These handwritten documents often appear in urgent situations—serious illness, imminent travel, or last‑minute changes to an existing plan that were never formally signed. Handwritten wills are not automatically valid in British Columbia, and even where courts have the authority to recognize them, the process can be uncertain and costly. Proper estate planning helps ensure that your wishes are clearly expressed and respected, without unnecessary legal complications.

Every situation is unique, and whether a handwritten document will be recognized as a valid will depends on the specific facts and circumstances involved. What may be accepted in one case may not be in another. For guidance on wills and estate planning in British Columbia, please contact Northam Law Corporation. You can reach us at 604-630-2350 or by email at melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Crafting Your Legacy: A Comprehensive Guide to Making Wills and the Importance of Legal Guidance

Risks of Self-Drafted Wills

Capacity to Make a Will in British Columbia: What the Law Requires

The post Handwritten (Holograph) Wills in British Columbia: Are They Valid? appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

Completion: When Ownership Changes Hands

Completion is the legal closing day. Your lawyer or notary files the transfer (and the buyer’s mortgage, if any) at the Land Title and Survey Authority of British Columbia (LTSA). Once registration is submitted and the closing steps are satisfied, the purchase money is released, the seller’s mortgage is paid out, and legal title changes to the buyer. Most standard BC contracts make deadlines strict (“time is of the essence”), so missing the completion date can be a breach of contract with serious consequences.

Adjustment: The Date Used to Split the Bills

The adjustment date is the “as of” date used to fairly split property‑related costs between seller and buyer on the Statement of Adjustments. Common items are municipal property taxes, strata fees and levies, and, for rented properties, rent and security deposits. In many BC residential deals using the standard contract, the adjustment date is set to match the possession date (often the day after completion), but the parties can agree to make it the same day as completion. Making sure everyone is clear on which date applies helps avoid math errors and surprises in the amount due on closing.

Possession: Keys and Move‑In

Possession is when the buyer is entitled to the keys and can move in. The standard contract commonly sets possession for 12:00 noon on the possession date unless stated otherwise. Even if the buyer becomes the registered owner on completion, there is no right to enter early without an express agreement. The seller must hand over the property in the agreed condition—often “vacant possession” unless the buyer has agreed to assume a tenancy.

Why Possession Often Follows Completion

Separating the days is a practical BC approach. Completing first lets title and funds settle, while giving the seller a short, defined window to move out. It also reduces risk from bank cut‑off times, LTSA registration timing, and moving logistics, making the handover smoother for both sides.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Trouble usually comes from late funding or registration, sellers not vacating by the possession time, or mistakes on the Statement of Adjustments (for example, using the wrong “as of” date or outdated tax/strata numbers). Early coordination among the parties—and double‑checking which date governs adjustments—goes a long way to preventing these issues.

In short: completion transfers legal title, the adjustment date governs the math, and possession delivers the keys. Understanding how these dates work together helps buyers and sellers set realistic expectations and close with confidence in BC.

Every real estate transaction is unique, and the timing of completion, adjustment, and possession can have important legal and practical implications. Please consult with Northam Law Corporation for your real estate and conveyancing needs to ensure your interests are protected. You can reach us directly at 604-630-2350 or via email at melissa@northam-law.com to discuss your specific situation.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Navigating the Conveyancing Process in British Columbia

Pre-Sale Condo Purchases in British Columbia: Key Legal Protections for Buyers

Joint Tenancy vs. Tenants-in-Common in BC: What Property Buyers Need to Know

The post Completion, Adjustment, and Possession Dates in BC Real Estate: A Plain‑Language Guide appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

Who the rules apply to

BC’s property-division rules apply to “spouses,” meaning married couples and unmarried partners who have lived together in a marriage‑like relationship for at least two years. Simply having a child together does not, on its own, create property‑division rights without the two‑year threshold for unmarried partners. The default starting point is equal sharing of family property and family debt, unless an equal split would be significantly unfair.

What counts as excluded property

Excluded property commonly includes what a spouse owned before the relationship began, as well as gifts or inheritances received from a third party during the relationship. Certain personal injury awards, some insurance proceeds, and some trust interests can also be excluded. Property that replaces excluded property (for example, selling excluded investments and buying another investment) can stay excluded if the link is clear and provable. The spouse claiming exclusion must prove it.

The big surprise: increases in value are usually shared

Even when an asset itself is excluded, any increase in its value during the relationship is generally “family property” and is usually shared. For example, if one spouse owned a home before moving in together, the home’s starting value may be excluded, but any rise in value during the relationship is typically divided—whether or not the title stayed in that spouse’s name.

Tracing and mixing funds

Keeping clear records matters. If excluded money is mixed with family money—such as putting an inheritance into a joint account and spending from it—it may still be possible to claim an exclusion, but only if the excluded amount can be reliably traced into the asset that exists at separation. Without a solid paper trail, the excluded claim can fail because it cannot be proven. Intention also matters: if an excluded asset, or money derived from it, is intentionally gifted to the other spouse (for example, putting a property solely in the other spouse’s name), the exclusion can be lost.

Gifts and inheritances

Gifts and inheritances received by one spouse are usually excluded. If those funds are used to buy or improve a family asset, an excluded interest can often be traced into that asset, provided the contribution was not intended as a gift to the other spouse. Any growth in value during the relationship remains generally divisible.

Debt matters too

Family debt—typically debts incurred during the relationship, and certain debts incurred after separation to maintain family property—is normally shared equally, again subject to the “significantly unfair” adjustment. This can affect the bottom line even where a spouse retains an excluded asset.

Agreements can change the default

Cohabitation or marriage agreements can set different rules for ownership, excluded property, and increases in value. For enforceability, the process matters: full financial disclosure, careful drafting, and informed, voluntary signing. Agreements may be set aside if significantly unfair, including where there was pressure, inadequate disclosure, or lack of understanding.

Every family situation is unique, so please consult with Northam Law Corporation for guidance tailored to your circumstances. You can reach us directly at 604-630-2350 or via email at melissa@northam-law.com to discuss your specific situation.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Common-Law Relationships and Property Division in B.C.

Property Division on Divorce or Separation in British Columbia

Liability For Partner’s Debt After Separation in B.C.

Legal Steps To Take To Protect Assets and Financial Interests In The Event of a Separation or Divorce

The post Excluded Property in British Columbia: Why “Keeping What You Brought In” Isn’t Always Simple appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

What the Law Requires in BC

Under the Workers Compensation Act, employers must protect worker health and safety. WorkSafeBC’s bullying and harassment requirements expect employers to have a clear policy, a way to report concerns, training for workers and supervisors, and a process to address and investigate complaints. Workplace violence, including threats, is regulated by the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation, which requires risk assessments, written procedures, worker instruction, and follow‑up after incidents.

The BC Human Rights Code prohibits discrimination and harassment based on protected characteristics such as sex, race, disability, religion, sexual orientation, and gender identity or expression. Decision‑makers look at whether the employer acted promptly, took the matter seriously, and used an impartial, effective process.

By contrast, the Employment Standards Act sets minimum standards (such as wages and hours) and does not set general harassment investigation rules. Privacy laws also apply. In the private sector, the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) permits collecting, using, and sharing personal information reasonably necessary for an investigation, on a need‑to‑know basis with appropriate safeguards.

When to Investigate

An investigation should begin when the employer knows—or reasonably should know—about possible serious misconduct or safety or human rights issues. A formal written complaint is not required. Reports to a supervisor, credible anonymous tips, observed incidents, or reliable third‑party information can all trigger the duty to act. Waiting for “something in writing” is risky where safety or human rights may be engaged.

Running a Fair Process

Start with triage: clarify the allegations, assess immediate risks, and consider short‑term steps such as temporary schedule changes, a no‑contact direction, or reassignment.

Select an investigator who is, and appears, neutral; consider an external investigator if senior leaders are involved or the situation is high‑risk.

Gather information methodically and proportionately by interviewing the people involved and relevant witnesses and reviewing emails, messages, and other records. Decide what most likely happened on the balance of probabilities (“more likely than not”), explain why, and tie conclusions to the evidence.

If policies or laws were breached, take proportionate action—training, coaching, policy updates, supervision changes, discipline, or termination as warranted. Make it clear that retaliation is prohibited; reprisals for raising concerns can create separate issues under WorkSafeBC rules and the Human Rights Code.

Privacy, Confidentiality, and Sharing the Outcome

Absolute secrecy is not realistic. Use a need‑to‑know approach, limiting access to those necessary to conduct the investigation or implement outcomes, and safeguard records appropriately. When the process concludes, inform the complainant and the respondent that it has finished and that appropriate steps were taken. Specific disciplinary details are usually not shared due to privacy.

Bottom Line

Workplace investigations are not optional in British Columbia — they are a legal responsibility. When handled properly, investigations protect employees, reduce liability, and reinforce a culture of respect. Employers who understand their obligations and follow best practices are far better positioned to respond effectively when issues arise.

Workplace complaints and investigations are highly fact-specific, and the appropriate response will depend on the nature of the allegations and the workplace involved. For guidance on managing workplace investigations and compliance obligations, please contact Northam Law Corporation at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Employment Protection in BC: Understanding Reasonable Notice Periods

Employee Hours and Reduction – Is It Okay?

Overtime and Employee Rights

The post Workplace Investigations in BC: A Plain‑Language Guide for Employers appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

Why planning matters in B.C.

Succession is not only about choosing a successor. It addresses who can make decisions if you are temporarily or permanently unable to do so, how ownership will transfer, and how the business will be funded and managed during any transition. Without a plan, families and co‑owners may face disputes, costly delays, tax exposure, and operational disruption.

Key documents to align

Incorporated businesses in B.C. are governed by the Business Corporations Act. The company’s articles, a shareholders’ agreement (if there are multiple owners), and your personal estate documents should work together. A well‑drafted shareholders’ agreement can set buy–sell terms on death, disability, retirement, or departure, and often contemplates funding through life or disability insurance.

Personal planning should include:

• A Will to govern how shares and other assets pass on death (noting that probate fees may apply in B.C.).
• An Enduring Power of Attorney to authorize someone to handle financial and property matters if you become incapable. Without one, a court appointment may be required, causing delay and expense.
• For personal and health decisions, consider a Representation Agreement.

Maintain corporate records, including the central securities register and B.C.’s required transparency register of “significant individuals,” so ownership and control are clear during a transition.

Tax considerations

Canada does not have an estate or inheritance tax, but there is generally a deemed disposition for capital gains on death, subject to possible rollover to a spouse or qualifying trust. The structure and timing of a transfer—to family, a co‑owner, or a third party—can significantly affect tax results. Owners of qualified small business corporation shares may be able to use the lifetime capital gains exemption if conditions are met. Strategies such as an estate freeze, the use of family, alter ego, or joint partner trusts, and insurance funding are commonly used to manage risk, cash flow, and taxes.

Getting practical

Start by identifying successors for both ownership and management, confirming how the transfer will be funded, and testing whether documents, insurance, and corporate records support that plan. Review the plan when ownership changes, new financing is added, or laws and tax rules evolve.

Every business is different, and succession planning strategies should reflect the company’s structure and long-term goals. For advice regarding business succession planning in British Columbia, please contact Northam Law Corporation at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

The Importance of Transition Planning For Businesses

Capacity to Make a Will in British Columbia: What the Law Requires

FAQs on Estate Planning: How Often Should I Update My Will?

The post Business Succession Planning in British Columbia: Preparing for the Unexpected appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

Verbal employment agreements can be enforceable, but the terms are often unclear

In British Columbia, an employment contract does not need to be in writing to exist. A binding agreement may be formed where the parties have agreed on essential terms such as the job, compensation, and start date.

The problem is usually not whether a contract exists, but what the contract actually says. Without a written agreement, parties may recall key discussions differently, and informal communications may not capture important details. Disputes commonly arise about job duties, hours of work, overtime expectations, bonuses or commissions, benefit entitlements, and what was promised about job security or advancement.

Termination is where undocumented arrangements most often create significant exposure

Termination is frequently the point at which verbal agreements cause the most serious problems. In British Columbia, the Employment Standards Act (the “ESA”) sets minimum termination notice or pay in lieu of notice. Those minimum standards cannot be contracted out of.

However, if there is no enforceable written contract limiting termination entitlements, an employee may be entitled to common law “reasonable notice,” which can exceed ESA minimums. Depending on the employee’s circumstances—such as position, length of service, age, and the availability of comparable employment—reasonable notice can amount to several months of compensation. This can come as a surprise where the parties assumed the ESA minimums would apply.

Key terms are often missing when nothing is documented

Verbal arrangements frequently leave important issues unresolved. Bonus and commission entitlements are a common flashpoint, including whether an incentive is discretionary or earned, how it is calculated, and whether it remains payable when employment ends. Benefit coverage can also create disputes, particularly around whether and how benefits continue during notice periods, including the statutory notice period under the ESA.

Other common gaps include whether employment is fixed-term or indefinite, the scope of confidentiality obligations, whether non-solicitation terms apply, and ownership of intellectual property or work product created during employment. When these issues are not addressed early and clearly, disputes often arise later—sometimes long after the working relationship seemed settled.

Changes over time can make the original “deal” hard to prove

Even where the relationship starts smoothly, employment usually evolves. Promotions, raises, restructuring, and role changes often occur without any written amendment. Over time, that can create uncertainty about what terms govern the relationship and what promises were made, particularly if the parties disagree later about compensation, duties, or termination entitlements.

Why written employment contracts reduce disputes

A well-drafted written employment contract helps both parties understand their rights and obligations from the start. For employers, it can clarify workplace expectations, protect confidential information, and set out termination terms intended to comply with the ESA while managing common law risk. For employees, it provides clarity about compensation, benefits, incentive plans, and the core expectations of the role. In most cases, written terms reduce the likelihood that misunderstandings become litigation.

Timing matters: introducing a contract after work has started

One recurring issue in British Columbia is presenting a written contract only after employment has already begun. Under common law principles, new or more restrictive terms introduced mid-employment may be unenforceable unless implemented properly, often requiring fresh consideration (or, in some circumstances, clear advance notice before the change takes effect). This can be particularly important for termination clauses—if a termination provision is not enforceable, the employer may remain exposed to common law reasonable notice despite having a signed document.

Final thoughts

Verbal employment agreements can be legally binding in British Columbia, but they often leave both employers and employees exposed to unnecessary risk. Clear written contracts—introduced at the appropriate time and drafted to comply with the Employment Standards Act—remain one of the most effective ways to prevent disputes and create predictability throughout the employment relationship.

Employment relationships and workplace needs vary widely, and contractual terms should reflect the specific circumstances of both employers and employees. For advice on employment contracts or workplace arrangements, please contact Northam Law Corporation at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Embracing Diversity and Inclusion: The Path to Organizational Success

Termination with Cause in British Columbia: Understanding the Legal Implication

Navigating Internships, Practicum Students, and Volunteers: Understanding Employment Law Implications

The post Employment Contracts in British Columbia: Why Verbal Agreements Are Risky appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

Understanding what title insurance covers (and what it does not), and how it differs from conveyancing due diligence, allows property owners and lenders to make informed choices about risk.

What Is Title Insurance?
Title insurance is a one-time premium insurance product issued by private insurers. It is designed to indemnify an owner or a lender for specific losses and legal costs arising from covered title defects or related risks. An owner’s policy typically remains effective for as long as the insured retains the insured interest in the property, while a lender’s policy generally remains in place for the life of the mortgage—subject to the policy terms.

How Title Insurance Fits Within BC’s Land Title System
British Columbia’s land title system operates under the Land Title Act and is based on a Torrens-style registration model. As a general rule, legal title and registered charges are determined by the land title register, which provides a high degree of certainty for purchasers and lenders.

That said, no system is immune from risk. Fraud, registration errors, and document defects—while uncommon—can occur. Title insurance is one tool used in practice to allocate the financial consequences of certain covered problems if they arise after completion.

What Title Insurance Can Cover (and What “Coverage” Really Means)
Coverage depends on the insurer and the policy wording. In most transactions, title insurance is intended to respond to certain risks that may not be revealed through routine closing searches or that arise from specific covered events after completion. These often include fraud or forgery affecting a transfer or mortgage, certain defects in title or document issues within the chain of title, and (in some policies) narrowly defined “off-title” risks such as particular encroachment, zoning, or permit-related issues.

It is worth being precise about “unknown liens.” Properly registered charges are generally discoverable through a standard title search. Where title insurance responds, it is typically because the issue falls within the policy’s definition of a covered defect or covered risk, not simply because something was “unknown” in a general sense.

Title Insurance vs. a Lawyer’s (or Notary’s) Role
Title insurance and conveyancing due diligence do different work. A lawyer or notary conducts the conveyancing process, reviews the state of title and registered charges, prepares and registers documents, and structures completion to comply with applicable BC requirements. Title insurance does not prevent defects from existing. Instead, it is a contractual promise to indemnify for covered loss and, in many cases, to fund or manage the legal response if a covered issue is discovered after closing.

Is Title Insurance Mandatory in BC?
Title insurance is not generally required by BC statute for every purchase. In practice, many mortgage lenders require it as a financing condition. Purchasers without financing may still opt for an owner’s policy depending on the property, the transaction’s complexity, and risk tolerance.

When Title Insurance Becomes Important
Claims commonly arise long after completion. For example, an owner might discover that a prior instrument in the chain of title was affected by fraud or forgery, that a document defect has created a covered title problem, or that a covered encroachment or permit issue has resulted in a defined loss or legal expense. Without title insurance, the cost of addressing the problem—whether through negotiation, remediation, litigation, or settlement—typically falls on the owner, subject to any other available remedies.

What Title Insurance Does Not Cover
Title insurance is not a catch-all. Policies commonly exclude issues that were known or disclosed before purchase (depending on wording), matters caused or permitted by the current owner after closing, risks that fall outside the policy’s definitions of “defect,” “covered risk,” or “loss,” and categories of risk that are expressly excluded (which may include certain boundary, environmental, or use-related issues, depending on the product).

Bottom Line
In British Columbia, title insurance is best understood as a targeted risk-transfer product. It does not replace conveyancing due diligence and should not be described as guaranteeing that no title problem can arise. It can, however, provide meaningful financial protection and a funded response if a covered issue emerges after closing—particularly where the cost of resolving the issue would otherwise be significant.

Whether title insurance is appropriate depends on the nature of the property, the transaction, and individual risk tolerance. Coverage and limitations can vary. To discuss how title insurance fits into your real estate transaction, please contact Northam Law Corporation at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Buyer Rights When a Material Latent Defect Is Discovered After Completion in British Columbia

Land Title Act of BC on Property Ownership Protection

Legal Title vs. Equitable Title

The post Title Insurance in British Columbia: What It Is, What It Covers, and When It Actually Matters appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

A separation agreement is more than a “signed document.” To be reliable, it must be built on informed consent, proper disclosure, and legally compliant terms—particularly where children are involved.

What a Separation Agreement Typically Covers
Most separation agreements address property division, allocation of family debt, spousal support, child support, and parenting arrangements. Depending on the family’s circumstances, they may also include tax provisions, life and health insurance obligations, dispute resolution clauses, and detailed implementation steps for selling or transferring assets.

In BC, these agreements are shaped by the Family Law Act and general contract principles. Where married spouses are involved, federal legislation may also be relevant for parenting and support issues.

Financial Disclosure: The Cornerstone of Enforceability
Agreements are frequently challenged on the basis of inadequate disclosure. If a party failed to disclose income, assets, or debts—or provided misleading information—the agreement may be vulnerable. Comprehensive, documented disclosure reduces the risk of later allegations of unfair bargaining or misrepresentation.

Independent Legal Advice: Not Always Required, Often Critical
While an agreement can be valid without each party obtaining independent legal advice, ILA is often decisive when enforceability is later contested. ILA helps establish that each party understood the legal consequences of the bargain, appreciated the rights being compromised, and entered the agreement voluntarily.

Voluntary Consent: Pressure and Duress Can Defeat the Agreement
Courts consider how the agreement was negotiated and signed. Time pressure, threats, emotional or financial coercion, or exploitation of a vulnerable party can undermine voluntariness. A durable agreement is one negotiated with reasonable time for review, meaningful disclosure, and an opportunity to obtain legal advice.

Children’s Issues: Agreements Cannot Override Legal Standards
Child-related provisions receive the highest level of judicial oversight. Child support generally must be consistent with the Federal Child Support Guidelines, and parenting terms must serve the child’s best interests. Even where both parents agree, terms that undermine these standards may be varied or replaced by court orders.

Property and Support: Departure Is Possible, But Not Without Risk
BC spouses can agree to outcomes that differ from statutory defaults. However, the court retains authority—under the Family Law Act and contract law—to intervene in defined circumstances, particularly where there was non‑disclosure, lack of understanding, exploitation, or an outcome that is significantly unfair.

Changing Circumstances: Plan for the Future
A well‑drafted agreement anticipates that circumstances may change. Child support is commonly recalculated as income changes, and spousal support may require review mechanisms. Clear review clauses and dispute-resolution provisions can reduce future conflict, though they do not eliminate the court’s jurisdiction where legislation requires oversight.

A separation agreement can be an effective instrument for resolving separation issues—provided it is constructed on full financial disclosure, voluntary and informed consent, and legally compliant child, support, and property terms. Careful drafting and thorough documentation materially improve the agreement’s resilience if later scrutinized by a court. An agreement that works for one couple may not be appropriate for another. For advice on preparing or reviewing a separation agreement, please contact Northam Law Corporation at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

The Difference Between Legal Separation and Divorce in BC

Navigating Separation Agreements and Child Custody in British Columbia

Liability For Partner’s Debt After Separation in B.C.

The post Separation Agreements in British Columbia: When Will the Court Enforce Them? appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

This article provides a concise overview of how relocation works under BC law and what courts focus on when a move is disputed.

1. What counts as a “relocation” under the FLA?

Under the FLA, a move is generally a relocation if it is likely to have a significant impact on the child’s relationship with another guardian or with a person who has parenting time or contact. The legal focus is not mileage alone. A move to another province will almost always affect a child’s relationship with the other parent in a significant way. However, a move within the same region can also qualify if it meaningfully disrupts a functioning schedule—such as regular weekday parenting time, school-based exchanges, or the child’s ability to participate in the other parent’s routines and community.

Because “impact” is the core concept, the first practical question is often whether the proposed move changes the child’s life and relationships in a way that the law treats as a relocation, as opposed to a routine change of address.

2. The 60-day written notice requirement (and limited exceptions)

Where a guardian proposes to relocate with a child, the FLA generally requires at least 60 days’ written notice to the other guardians and to anyone who has parenting time or contact with the child. The notice must include the proposed relocation date, the location, and a proposal for revised parenting arrangements after the move.

A relocation notice should be treated as more than a heads-up. In contested cases, the court will expect that the notice (and any follow-up communication) reflects a genuine effort to explain how the child’s key relationships will be preserved after the move. A notice that lacks detail, is delivered at the last minute, or appears designed to force a crisis timeline can materially weaken the relocating party’s position.

The FLA also recognizes that there are circumstances where standard notice may not be appropriate—most commonly where safety or family violence concerns are engaged. In those cases, the court can manage notice requirements and related protections based on the evidence.

3. Is written consent or a court order required before moving?

A frequent misconception is that a parent always needs the other parent’s written consent or a court order to relocate. The FLA is more procedural than that: it is built around notice and the opportunity to object.

If the other affected guardian (or a person with parenting time/contact) provides written consent, the relocation can generally proceed on the agreed terms. In practice, it is prudent for any consent to be paired with an updated parenting plan addressing travel, holiday time, communication, and cost-sharing, so that the post-move arrangements are clear and enforceable.

If there is no consent, the key issue becomes whether the other party objects within the statutory timeframe and brings the dispute to court for determination. Where there is a timely objection and the matter is properly before the court, the relocating guardian will generally require a court order to relocate with the child.

Existing orders or written agreements can also change the landscape. Some contain mobility terms (for example, restrictions on removing a child from a specified area, or requirements for particular notice). If a proposed move conflicts with an existing order, it may require a variation or further court direction before the move occurs.

4. How BC courts decide disputed relocation applications

Relocation disputes are determined under the FLA’s best interests of the child test, but the relocation provisions add specific structure to the analysis. The court’s task is not to decide which parent has better personal reasons for moving or staying. The question is whether the proposed relocation, in the context of the family’s circumstances and the statutory framework, is in the child’s best interests.

Two themes commonly drive outcomes:

First, good faith. The FLA requires the court to consider whether the proposed relocation is made in good faith. Legitimate motivations—such as employment, education, housing stability, proximity to family supports, or safety—can be relevant, but the court will also scrutinize conduct. Timing, transparency, and the relocating parent’s approach to preserving the child’s other relationships often matter as much as the stated reason for the move.

Second, whether there is a reasonable proposal for parenting time/contact after relocation. Courts tend to focus heavily on the practicality of the plan: whether it is workable during the school year, how travel will occur, who will pay, how exchanges will be managed, and whether the proposal realistically maintains the child’s relationship with the other parent. A vague plan (“lots of video calls” or “we will figure it out”) is rarely persuasive. A detailed plan tailored to the child’s age, schedule, and needs usually carries more weight.

The FLA also directs that the court must not decide the case based on whether the relocating guardian would move without the child. The analysis remains child-centred and grounded in the statutory relocation framework, rather than using “would you still move?” as a deciding factor.

Finally, it is important that the FLA treats cases differently depending on the parenting arrangement before the move. Where parenting time is substantially equal, the relocating parent typically faces a more demanding best-interests analysis because the move would fundamentally change the child’s lived experience of having two active households. Where the child resides primarily with one guardian, and that guardian shows good faith and a reasonable proposal, the legislation can shift the onus in a way that is more favourable to relocation. This distinction is one reason why relocation outcomes can vary significantly between families.

5. What happens if someone relocates without following the FLA process?

Relocating without proper notice, in the face of a dispute, or contrary to an existing order can trigger immediate court intervention. The court may order the child returned, revise parenting arrangements, and treat unilateral action as evidence that a parent is unwilling to support the child’s relationship with the other parent—an issue that can affect future parenting determinations and costs. In short, creating a “new normal” by moving first is a high-risk approach under BC’s relocation regime.

Relocation cases depend heavily on individual family circumstances and the specific needs of the child involved. Outcomes can vary significantly from case to case. If you are considering relocation or responding to a proposed move, Northam Law Corporation can provide advice tailored to your situation. Please contact us at 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Child Support Guidelines

Visitation and Custody Rights of Grandparents

Entitlement and Duration of Spousal Support in British Columbia

The Difference Between Legal Separation and Divorce in BC

The post Relocating With a Child in British Columbia: Notice, Objections, and When the Court Becomes Involved appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.

A clear understanding of how capacity is assessed under British Columbia law can help reduce the risk of future challenges and preserve the Will-maker’s intentions.

Testamentary Capacity in British Columbia: The Legal Standard

British Columbia courts assess testamentary capacity primarily through common law principles (often associated with the Banks v. Goodfellow framework). In practical terms, the question is whether, at the relevant time, the Will-maker had a sufficient level of understanding to make a Will.

Capacity does not require perfect memory or ideal health. The Will-maker is generally expected to understand that they are making a Will and that it Will govern the distribution of their property on death. The Will-maker should also be able to understand, in a general way, what property they own and the nature of their assets, even if they cannot provide an exact inventory. Finally, the Will-maker must be able to recognize the people who might reasonably be expected to benefit—often close family members—and form a rational plan for distribution in light of those relationships.

Although the legal focus is the moment of execution, evidence from before and after the signing frequently becomes important in disputed cases, particularly where capacity fluctuated or declined over time. Where instructions were given on one date and the Will was executed on another, the Will-maker’s capacity at both stages may become relevant to the court’s assessment.

Statutory Context Under WESA

British Columbia’s Wills, Estates and Succession Act (WESA) provides the statutory framework for Wills and estate administration. As a general rule, WESAcontemplates that a Will-maker must be at least 16 years of age and mentally capable to make a valid Will (subject to limited statutory exceptions). While WESA supplies the legislative structure, the detailed content of “testamentary capacity” is largely supplied by the common law test applied by the courts.

Capacity Is Not a Diagnosis

A frequent misconception is that a diagnosis of dementia, cognitive decline, or mental illness automatically prevents a person from making a Will. That is not the law in British Columbia. The legal inquiry is functional and time-specific: the issue is whether the Will-maker met the legal standard when the Will was made.

Accordingly, an elderly person, or a person living with memory impairment or a cognitive diagnosis, may still have testamentary capacity—particularly where cognition fluctuates. In appropriate cases, a “lucid interval” may be relied upon, but it must be supported by credible evidence showing the Will-maker understood what they were doing at the relevant time.

The reverse is also true. The absence of a diagnosis does not guarantee capacity. A person may lack testamentary capacity if they cannot understand the nature and consequences of making a Will, cannot comprehend their property in broad terms, or cannot appreciate the claims of those who might reasonably expect to benefit.

Why Capacity Challenges Arise After Death

Capacity disputes most commonly arise after death, often brought by individuals who expected to receive more under the Will or who were excluded entirely. These challenges are more likely where a Will represents a marked departure from prior plans, where close family members are disinherited, or where the Will was made during a period of illness, hospitalization, or observable cognitive decline.

British Columbia courts typically examine the surrounding circumstances carefully. In practice, capacity allegations are frequently advanced alongside related claims such as lack of knowledge and approval, and undue influence. Where the circumstances appear unusual or concerning, the court may require stronger evidence that the Will-maker both had capacity and understood and approved the contents of the Will. This is often discussed in the case law under the concept of “suspicious circumstances.”

What Evidence Tends to Matter Most

In a contested file, the court’s assessment is often evidence-driven. The drafting lawyer’s contemporaneous notes, observations, and file documentation can be highly influential, particularly where they demonstrate a careful interview process and a clear record of the Will-maker’s understanding and reasons. Medical records may also be relevant, though medical evidence is not determinative of the legal question. Evidence from witnesses, caregivers, family members, and friends about the Will-maker’s functioning and communications around the time of the Will can also be important.

Because the Will-maker is not available to clarify intentions after death, well-created contemporaneous records often become the foundation of the court’s factual findings.

The Lawyer’s Role and Common Safeguards in Higher-Risk Files

Although testamentary capacity is ultimately a legal determination for the court, competent Wills practice in British Columbia requires attentiveness to capacity concerns and appropriate inquiry where “red flags” exist. In higher-risk circumstances—such as significant cognitive impairment, major changes to beneficiaries, dependency dynamics, or heightened family conflict—additional safeguards are commonly used. These may include meeting privately with the Will-maker to obtain instructions free from influence, documenting the Will-maker’s reasoning for key decisions, and, where appropriate, obtaining a contemporaneous medical opinion focused on functional decision-making.

These steps are generally intended to protect the Will-maker’s autonomy and reduce the likelihood that the Will is later undermined by avoidable evidentiary gaps.

If Capacity Is Lacking: What Happens to the Estate

If the court finds that the Will-maker lacked testamentary capacity when the Will was made, the Will may be declared invalid (in whole or in part). In that event, an earlier valid Will may govern the estate. If there is no earlier valid Will, the estate Will be distributed according to the intestacy provisions of WESA, which may produce outcomes that differ substantially from what the deceased intended.

Reducing Risk Through Proactive Planning

Capacity-related disputes are highly fact-specific, but the risk of litigation often decreases when planning is done early, reviewed periodically, and carefully documented—particularly where a Will departs from what family members might expect. Where capacity may be questioned in the future, the manner in which the Will is prepared and executed can be as important as the wording of the Will itself.

Questions of capacity depend on the circumstances at the time a Will is made, and what is sufficient in one situation may not be sufficient in another. If there are concerns about capacity or a Will is being made in complex circumstances, Northam Law Corporation can assist with BC estate planning. Please contact 604-630-2350 or melissa@northam-law.com.

** The information in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws can and do change over time and every legal situation is unique. You should consult with a qualified legal professional, such as the team at Northam Law, to obtain advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any decisions.

Related Articles:

Understanding the Differences: Powers of Attorney in British Columbia

FAQs on Estate Planning: What Happens If I Die Without a Will?

Navigating the Complexities: Issues Concerning Multiple Wills in British Columbia

The post Capacity to Make a Will in British Columbia: What the Law Requires appeared first on Northam Law Corporation.