Justice Allissa Mitchell
Posted on 02/22/2016 5:22:36 AM PST by rickmichaels
An Ontario judge has struck down a deceased doctor’s attempt to set up university scholarships exclusively for white, single and heterosexual students, ruling the unusual stipulations clash with “public policy.â€
Dr. Victor Priebe’s trustee should ignore the discriminatory directions his will set out for the proposed bursary, said the Superior Court of Justice decision.
“Although it is not expressly stated by Dr. Priebe that he subscribed to white supremacist, homophobic and misogynistic views … (the will’s statements) leave no doubt as to Dr. Priebe’s views,†said Justice Alissa Mitchell.
Her decision invoked a little-known legal principle - stemming from an 80-year-old Supreme Court of Canada judgment - that allows courts to quash people’s final wishes if they clearly offend the interests of the state.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.nationalpost.com ...
Unteresting—but wills are challenged all the time. A good reason to spend it while you can, rather than trust a crooked system to spend it for you.
Oh Canada
I’m pretty sure there are scholarships dedicated to this or that minority or special class of student. Why should the judge over-rule this bequest?
And, if he does over-rule the bequest, is he ordering the bursar to apply the funds differently? If so, this is of a piece with the more general state interest in seizing my funds through taxes (both during and post-life) and distributing them to its favored classes of clients.
Oh, addendum—I see it’s Canada, but I could easily see the same result here.
“I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me, and who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will be master of all for which I toiled and used my wisdom under the sun. This also is vanity.” (Ecclesiastes 2:18-19 ESV)
Overruled a will ??? That’s nuts.
But they’ll take his money anyway.
Is it the interest of the state that is offended or is it the will of the state that is offended? Or maybe it is the sensibilities of the judge that are offended.
After all I very much doubt that in the larger sense of things that the doctor's restrictions of the disbursement of his legacy can have much impact in the vast dealings of the nation of Canada. Other than the publishing of some self-righteous articles bemoaning the racist doctor's scholarship fund I just don't see there being any great impact on Canada by this doctor having his way in disposing of his estate after his death.
Of course leaving it only to gay black students would have been allowed, and we all know that’s not even a stretch. The left are fascists.
When I was in grad school, my program (information systems) had two scholarsips available — the Minority Student scolarship and the Martin Luther King scholarship.
I didn’t get either one.
A will cannot make something legal after death that would be illegal if done before death.
-Overruled a will ??? That’s nuts.-
It happens all the time. This is why people hire lawyers who make certain the will follows the existing law. My mother-s will is updated yearly to reflect changes in laws. It should have been obvious to whoever wrote the will it would not stand in this PC environment. The only way the doctor could have had his way would be to give the money away while he was alive.
Walter Annenberg set up a foundation to administer his money for conservative purposes. This is the same foundation that gave money to Bill Ayers and Barak Obama in their famous -failed- attempt to educate children. The real purpose, of course, was to suck money into liberal causes. There is no way to protect your money for a conservative purpose after you are dead.
Even better, if he so wanted more Muslims in Canada that he directed it only to go to Muslim students, they would have erected a statue in his honor.
private property IS NOT PART OF PUBLIC POLICY
Justice Allissa Mitchell
The Register of Wills is the most crooked office in the county I live in.
BIG money passes through there.
Thee judges and the hearings of the Orphan’s Court which hears related cases are laughable, they are so obviously croaked.
there should be a clause in the will stating that if any bequest is found illegal, the funds should be applied to something else.
Say in other words, if the funds can’t be applied as directed, they can’t be applie by the judge to the same purpose but without the resrictions.
would that hold up, do you think?
Blonde brains.
Even if you leave it to the Salvation Army, they might change “management” immediately after you’re dead. I know the McDonald heiress managed her SA bequest very well, and it may be what is keep the good charity honest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.