On May 6, 2020, reasons for judgment were released in Swereda (Re), a decision by Madam Justice Shergill.
The petition was originally brought seeking appointment of a committee for the person and estate of Ms. Swereda. It was opposed by the Public Guardian and Trustee (PGT).
Tragically, Ms. Swereda passed away before the petition could be heard by the court.
The issue before Madam Justice Shergill was whether the petitioner was entitled to her costs on the basis that she brought the petition for the benefit, and in the best interests, of Ms. Swereda.
The PGT was opposing the application, and seeking its own costs. It alleged that the petition was not brought in the best interests of Ms. Swereda, but rather out of a desire for control.
Ultimately, the application for costs was successful. The court accepted the petitioner’s arguments that the petition was brought in the best interests of Ms. Swereda, and concluded that the petitioner was “a vocal and forceful advocate who at all times was trying to act in the Patient’s best interests”.
Further, that although the petitioner might have “ruffled a few feathers” with care workers, she “expended her own resources and a considerable amount of time taking care of Ms. Swereda’s interests, all without any obvious personal benefit.”
When it comes to the question of whether a parent is required to provide for their child in their will in BC, the answer is far more complex than a simple yes.
Hammerco Lawyers is bringing a proposed class action lawsuit on behalf of all individuals who were subjected to solitary confinement at one or more of the youth custody centres operated by the Province of BC.