Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff claimed a binding "Legacy Agreement" entitling her to her aunt's estate in return for decades of unpaid service.

• Defendants denied any such agreement and challenged the authenticity of supporting documents.

• Trial court dismissed all claims, finding two critical documents were likely forged.

• Plaintiff's appeal and application to the Supreme Court of Canada were both unsuccessful.

• Defendants sought $2.4 million in special costs, later reduced by 30% and sent for assessment.

• Registrar’s decision focused on disclosure obligations and partial waiver of solicitor-client privilege in cost assessment.

Facts and outcome of the case

Background and claims

Barbara De Angelis, the plaintiff, brought an action against her aunt, Annie Siermy, and a related company, J & A Properties Ltd., claiming that her aunt had promised her the bulk of a sizeable estate in return for over 40 years of unpaid personal services. This alleged promise, referred to as the “Legacy Agreement,” was said to be confirmed in a 2002 will and in three handwritten notes dubbed the “Letters from the Grave.”

The plaintiff asserted that these commitments were later revoked in 2011 when Ms. Siermy created a new will naming a different niece as the primary beneficiary. De Angelis sought specific performance of the alleged agreement or, in the alternative, the imposition of a constructive trust or damages for unjust enrichment.

Trial outcome

The case was tried over a 19-day hybrid summary trial. The unique aspect was that Ms. Siermy, still alive, testified and denied any such agreement or authorship of the letters in question. Handwriting experts were called to opine on whether the letters were authentic. Justice Ross found that there was no Legacy Agreement and concluded that De Angelis either forged or improperly obtained signatures on two of the three letters. As a result, the claim was dismissed in full in De Angelis v. Siermy, 2022 BCSC 31.

Appeals and finality

The plaintiff appealed the dismissal, but the British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld the decision in 2022 BCCA 401. The Supreme Court of Canada later denied leave to appeal in 2023 CanLII 67205 (SCC). These actions finalized the finding that no contractual obligation or unjust enrichment existed, and no damages or equitable remedies were owed to the plaintiff.

Costs and registrar’s decision

Following the conclusion of the appeal process, the defendants pursued special costs totaling $2,416,575.65. While the trial judge granted special costs, he applied a 30% reduction and referred the matter to a registrar for assessment rather than issuing a fixed lump sum.

In De Angelis v. Siermy, 2025 BCSC 1031, the registrar addressed whether the defendants were required to disclose their lawyers’ full files to justify the special costs claim. The defendants had submitted affidavits summarizing time entries but had not provided actual invoices or full file contents. The registrar ruled that, due to the defendants’ own disclosure strategy and the complexity and amount involved, partial solicitor-client privilege had been waived. As a result, the defendants were ordered to produce all invoices and a categorized list of withheld documents identifying whether claims of privilege or irrelevance applied.

The outcome of this decision emphasized the principle that while solicitor-client privilege is protected, it may be partially waived when a party seeks reimbursement of legal costs and chooses to submit file-based justification. The registrar did not fix the final amount but laid out the framework for a proportionate, transparent cost assessment process, with the estimated recovery standing at approximately $1.7 million pending final review.