×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。
Ad by
  • 最优利率和cashback可以申请特批，好信用好收入offer更好。请点链接扫码加微信咨询，Scotiabank -- Nick Zhang 6478812600。

@Atlanta

In Canadian law,

locker(locker)
there are no specific provisions that automatically disqualify an heir from inheritance based on criminal actions like murder or violence. However, courts have applied the “slayer rule”, which is based on common law principles. The slayer rule prevents a person from benefiting from a crime, particularly if they are responsible for causing the death of the deceased. This rule follows the maxim: “a person cannot profit from their own crime.”

Here are some key points about how this applies in Canada:

1. Murder or Manslaughter: If an heir is found guilty of murdering or manslaughtering the deceased, they will typically be disqualified from inheriting any property from the victim’s estate. This includes both intestate succession (where there is no will) and situations where the heir is named in a will.
2. Civil Forfeiture: Even if a person is not convicted of a crime (for example, in a case of acquittal or lack of criminal charges), civil courts may still prevent them from inheriting if it is proven on a balance of probabilities (a lower standard than criminal law) that they were responsible for the death.
3. Impact on Wills: If the person responsible for the death is a beneficiary in the deceased’s will, courts may use the slayer rule to void their inheritance rights, treating them as if they predeceased the victim.

In summary, under Canadian law, individuals who are found to be responsible for the unlawful death of the testator (person making the will) or another heir can be deprived of their inheritance, but this rule comes from case law and legal principles rather than explicit statutory provisions.
(#16347752@0)
Last Updated: 10-22
Sign in and Reply Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下家园 / 幸福家庭 / 今天听到一事儿，心里有点堵 -youbet(不亦乐乎); 10-22 {482} (#16347464@0) +1
    前阵安省有个灭门自杀案，貌似很幸福阳光的一家人，男人杀了老婆和俩娃后自杀，很震惊的。一朋友偶遇一律师闲聊几句，那律师现在正是此案的律师，估计是指派的，其实也没啥事儿，就是得经常跑法院。为啥呢，因为妻子先过世，她名下所有财产归老公，现在是老公的遗产。包括车，房，和现金。她娘家爸妈退休前都是高收入，不缺钱，但是也不想帮付保险，律师不想让车房没保险，就得去法院要钱。天，这啥法律啊。再联想一下，清华那小两口的房子是不是也归男生，男生打官司估计会把钱花光，女孩的父母怕是一分钱也拿不到吧？
    • 去法院问女方爸妈要钱的依据是什么？不可能吧? -thegirlbefore(退一步海阔天空); 10-22 (#16347467@0)
      • 哦，我没说清楚，不是跟女方爸妈要钱，是拿女方的钱付女方名下的保险。我猜女方的爸妈曾帮付过。我猜如果他们缺钱的话应该能打官司把车房和一部分现金要回来，给律师省事儿了。 -youbet(不亦乐乎); 10-22 (#16347471@0)
        • 男主都不在了，还保 P 险啊。遗产给谁了？给谁用，谁出钱呗。律师脑袋里是**吗？ -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347490@0) +1
          • 就是没人要遗产呗。6月份的事儿，不知道是不是有时限的。 -youbet(不亦乐乎); 10-22 (#16347496@0)
            • 没人要遗产，遗产不是充公嘛。充公了，自然是政府给钱。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347497@0)
          • 律师出庭费应该不低，最后从遗产里面扣 -piglet(Money bank); 10-22 (#16347513@0)
            • 那是。反正没人管，自己说了算。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347518@0)
        • 女方死了保险不就应该生效了吗，为什么还要继续付？如果女方名下有个人财产，这部分应该不是男方自动继承。 -thegirlbefore(退一步海阔天空); 10-22 (#16347505@0)
          • 说的是 auto insurance and homeowner insurance。你说的是 insurance payout upon death。乱套了。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347529@0)
            • 这两个都可以不买，主要是律师贪心。 -thegirlbefore(退一步海阔天空); 10-22 (#16347531@0) +2
              • 律师不关心谁付这两个，只关心 max 自己的 hours (aka 律师费）。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347539@0) +1
              • 不买万一出了事谁负责？车动辄几万块，房子动辄上百万。 -letempsdescerises(再回首 云遮断归途); 10-22 (#16347572@0) +1
                • 主贴里人都死了呀，不需要负责了。好奇律师是怎么接到这个案子的？ -thegirlbefore(退一步海阔天空); 10-22 (#16347589@0) +1
                  • 😂死者确实不用负责，关键律师又不是为死者服务。 -letempsdescerises(再回首 云遮断归途); 10-22 (#16347603@0) +1
                  • 不是说指派的嘛。Public defender？照理说 public defender 是政府出钱养。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347623@0) +1
    • 女方父母当然不想付啊，什么法律啊杀了人家娃还要占人家财产 -zxcvb(朝天椒); 10-22 (#16347499@0)
    • 这个律师说那么多话啊，律师对无关人士不是要守口如瓶的吗 -goretex(秋天); 10-22 (#16347553@0) +1
      • 开心的合不拢嘴？ -**🐎; 10-22 (#16348048@0)
    • 加拿大对待死人是钱财上能榨多光就榨多光，然后给带个高帽子说是公平处理尊重人权 -palwang2000(重现江湖); 10-22 (#16347554@0) +2
    • 是啊，没遗嘱的情况下谁早死谁倒霉。所以遗嘱很重要。 -letempsdescerises(再回首 云遮断归途); 10-22 (#16347563@0)
    • 老公杀了老婆再自杀，所以老婆先过世，遗产归老公？这逻辑听上去怎么这么别扭啊。 -laohu667(老少不定); 10-22 (#16347635@0) +3
      • 得把孩子也都杀净，才能拿到遗产。 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347642@0) +1
        • 然后政府鼓励再自杀？然后再派律师去收钱 -palwang2000(重现江湖); 10-22 (#16347646@0) +2
          • 估计是，还得收到最大化的钱。 -thegirlbefore(退一步海阔天空); 10-22 (#16347660@0) +1
          • Conspiracy 不大像 -troyd(老陈); 10-22 (#16347661@0)
            • 依法办事，合法收费 -palwang2000(重现江湖); 10-22 (#16347773@0) +1
        • 男人杀了老婆和俩娃后自杀 (#16347464@0) -tulipwa68(夜来风雨声); 10-22 (#16347736@0)
    • 大约五分之一的凶杀案是发生在家庭关系或者亲密关系的人之间，家庭关系包括夫妻，父母子女，兄弟姐妹，亲密关系比如男女朋友之间。 -14feb(秋天来了); 10-22 (#16347699@0)
    • 剥夺继承权：如果继承人有①主观上有杀害其他继承人的故意②客观上实施了非法剥夺其他继承人生命的行为这两种情况中的一种。 -locker(locker); 10-22 (#16347723@0)
      • 安省的法律是这样的吗？ -tulipwa68(夜来风雨声); 10-22 (#16347740@0) +1
        • In Canadian law, -locker(locker); 10-22 {1693} (#16347752@0)
          there are no specific provisions that automatically disqualify an heir from inheritance based on criminal actions like murder or violence. However, courts have applied the “slayer rule”, which is based on common law principles. The slayer rule prevents a person from benefiting from a crime, particularly if they are responsible for causing the death of the deceased. This rule follows the maxim: “a person cannot profit from their own crime.”

          Here are some key points about how this applies in Canada:

          1. Murder or Manslaughter: If an heir is found guilty of murdering or manslaughtering the deceased, they will typically be disqualified from inheriting any property from the victim’s estate. This includes both intestate succession (where there is no will) and situations where the heir is named in a will.
          2. Civil Forfeiture: Even if a person is not convicted of a crime (for example, in a case of acquittal or lack of criminal charges), civil courts may still prevent them from inheriting if it is proven on a balance of probabilities (a lower standard than criminal law) that they were responsible for the death.
          3. Impact on Wills: If the person responsible for the death is a beneficiary in the deceased’s will, courts may use the slayer rule to void their inheritance rights, treating them as if they predeceased the victim.

          In summary, under Canadian law, individuals who are found to be responsible for the unlawful death of the testator (person making the will) or another heir can be deprived of their inheritance, but this rule comes from case law and legal principles rather than explicit statutory provisions.
          • makes sense. -cancad(Solvtolaski); 10-22 (#16347772@0)
          • 多谢！ -tulipwa68(夜来风雨声); 10-23 (#16348185@0)
          • "If an heir is found guilty of murdering or manslaughtering the deceased"， 对死了的人可能不适用 -piglet(Money bank); 10-23 (#16348300@0)
          • 国内的法律应该也是一样的。不然就是鼓励犯罪杀人了 -tracyd(等待明天); 10-23 (#16348312@0)
    • 钱很重要吗？女方父母很明白 -giss(rr); 10-22 (#16347730@0)

More Topics

  • 这种违背人性的故事，一看就是编的瞎话
  • 今天中午，跟PSW 的老公聊天。他们合同到期，去温哥华。我极力挽留，但无果
  • 应招
  • 现在的婚姻也没大人啥事，儿子知会说求婚了，大人该对准儿媳有啥表示？
  • 为什么川普总统能够拿下密西根州？ 得益于二女儿的婚姻。
    • 枫下论坛主坛 /  枫下家园 /  幸福家庭