iStockphoto/Getty Images/iStockphoto
Using a funeral to humiliate her sister-in-law, over alleged infidelities, in front of hundreds of mourners turned out to be a costly move for a Montreal-area woman.
Earlier this month, the Quebec Superior Court ordered the woman to pay $40,000 in damages to her sister-in-law and two nieces, and overturned a will that had named her as the sole beneficiary of her brother's estate.
The woman was seemingly convinced that her sister-in-law had been unfaithful to her husband, who had just died of cancer.
At the funeral, the woman played a video montage of a tense conversation between her brother and his wife, which had been taped about four weeks before his death.
"The conversation dealt with the private life of mister and madam, consisting in a precise account of Madam's alleged infidelities," said Judge Pierre Journet in his ruling. "The broadcasting of this tape at the supper after the funeral caused scandal, shock and humiliation for Madam and her kids, in front of the members of the Armenian community who were in attendance."
Some mourners walked out of the event, and Justice Journet said the widow and her two children suffered important psychological trauma, stress and anxiety. As a result, he ordered the woman who had made and broadcasted the recording to pay $40,000 in moral and punitive damages.
"The court is of the view that broadcasting this illegal recording of a private conversation between spouses is not only blameworthy, but constitutes an act of meanness that must be punished," Justice Journet said.
In his ruling, he added that the woman who made the tape "expressed no contrition or regret after these deplorable events."
According to evidence presented during the court hearing, the husband, who came from a conservative background, never fully trusted his wife, having had doubts about her virginity at the time of their wedding. According to a psychologist who was an expert witness at the trial, the husband's immediate family quickly "rejected" his Iranian-born wife, which marred their relationship in ensuing years.
The other element at the heart of the court case was the husband's will, which he changed in August, 2013, to name his sister as sole beneficiary.
According to evidence presented, the husband wanted to cut his wife out of his will, to ensure that his two daughters received all of his assets. However, given he did not want his wife to manage the assets, he named his sister as the sole beneficiary, with the expectation that she would share the assets among his daughters.
However, Justice Journet determined that the 2013 will did not specifically reflect the man's last wishes, which was that his two daughters would be the ultimate beneficiaries of his estate.
As such, in his ruling, Justice Journet declared that the 2013 will was invalid, to be replaced by a 2012 will that named his wife as sole beneficiary. According to the judge, the husband's sister served as his translator in the preparation of the 2013 will, and he said that the man's wishes were not reflected in the notarized document.
"Had he realized what was stated in the will, he would not have signed it, because it did not reflect his last wishes," Justice Journet said.
In his ruling, the judge called on the man's sister to return all sums of money and assets from her brother's estate to his widow.
The Globe and Mail is not naming the parties in this court case to protect the identity of the two children involved, who are still teenagers.