Summary#
Bill 13, An Act to Amend the Wills Act, would amend New Brunswick’s Wills Act and make related changes to the Probate Court Act. The text does not state a separate goal; it would set new rules for making and interpreting wills and for what happens to gifts when circumstances change. The supplied text is the bill as tabled at first reading, not a consolidated law; it is not yet law, and its start date would be set by proclamation.
- A person could make, change or revoke a will at age 16 or older if they have the mental capacity to do so. This rule would apply only to wills made after the section starts.
- A witness would have to be an adult with mental capacity. A will would not be invalid just because a witness was not competent, but a gift to a witness or the witness’s spouse or common-law partner would generally be void unless an exception applies.
- Divorce, marriage annulment, or a qualifying separation or common-law relationship breakdown would revoke certain gifts and appointments in favour of the former or separated partner, unless the will or a specified agreement shows a contrary intention.
- Courts could consider evidence about a testator’s circumstances and intended meaning when interpreting a will, even if no ambiguity has first been found.
- The bill would set a default order for distributing gifts that cannot take effect, change rules about certain debts secured against property, and remove specified common-law presumptions about gifts and debts.
- It would also change rules for people born to unmarried parents and make related changes to Probate Court procedures.
What it means for you#
- People making wills: If the bill takes effect, you could make or change a will from age 16, if you have mental capacity. A will made before the changes start would not be invalidated just because of the new rules, and a will already revoked would not be revived.
- Witnesses and beneficiaries: A beneficiary could witness a will without that alone making the will invalid. But a gift to that witness or their spouse or common-law partner would generally be void. A court could preserve the gift if satisfied the testator intended it and the witness did not exert undue influence. An application normally must be made within six months of the testator’s death, though a court could extend that time. Other exceptions include certain debt repayments, personal-representative fees, and cases with at least two witnesses who are not beneficiaries or their spouses or common-law partners.
- Former or separated partners: Certain gifts, appointments as personal representative or trustee, and powers of appointment in favour of a former spouse or common-law partner would be revoked under the bill’s conditions. The bill defines a common-law partner as someone who has lived continuously in a conjugal relationship with another person for at least two years.
- People inheriting property: If a gift fails, the bill sets a default order: an alternate beneficiary, certain descendants, surviving residuary beneficiaries (those named to receive what remains), then distribution as if the testator died without a will. The court could find that the will shows a different intention.
- General public: The bill does not create a new front-line service or directly transfer property. A purported gift of property the testator does not own would be void, but the owner’s rights as a beneficiary would not be affected.
Money#
No cost information is in the available material.
- The bill gives no estimate for court, administration or other public costs.
- It sets no new tax, fee, fine or benefit. Court applications may be needed in some disputes, but the bill does not state their costs.
What is unclear#
- The supplied material does not include the current Wills Act or Probate Court Act, so I could not verify the full current rules or precisely compare every change with current law.
- The bill does not explain how courts would assess some key terms, including “undue influence,” “contrary intention,” or when a common-law relationship has been “permanently” terminated.
- It does not set out a process for interpreting wills beyond allowing the court to admit specified evidence, or provide timelines for those decisions.
- The rules generally apply to wills where the testator dies after they start, even if the will was made earlier. However, the bill has specific exceptions and transition rules; the outcome for a particular will may depend on when the will, death, divorce or separation occurred.
- The text supplied includes no later version or amendment record, so it does not establish whether the bill was changed after first reading.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to make wills reflect a testator’s actual intent. Allowing courts to consider context and intent could help resolve disputes where the wording does not clearly show what the testator meant.
- A possible argument for the relationship-breakdown rules is that they would prevent certain gifts or appointments from continuing automatically after a marriage or partnership ends.
- The bill would provide a default route for property when a gift fails, rather than leaving that question to be inferred from the will alone.
- The bill would clarify that a will is not invalid only because a witness was incompetent, while setting safeguards for gifts to witnesses.
Case against#
- The new witness-gift rules could lead to disputes over whether a gift is void, whether the testator intended it, and whether undue influence occurred. The six-month application deadline may also matter to people who learn of a problem later.
- Allowing courts to consider evidence of intent without first finding ambiguity could broaden the evidence used in will disputes. The bill does not estimate the effect on court workload or costs.
- Separation and relationship-breakdown rules depend on facts that could be contested, such as whether a couple had separated or permanently ended a common-law relationship.
- The bill’s transition rules are detailed and may make it harder for people to know which rules apply to a will, especially when the will, separation or death occurred at different times.