Estate mediation
Resolving disputes related to an estate
Has a loved one recently passed away and inheritance sharing has become a source of conflict?
Are you an estate liquidator facing difficult collaboration with heirs?
Do you represent heirs in a dispute that seems endless?
Estate mediation led by a CHABOT Mediateurs Avocats professional can address your concerns. Our accredited, impartial, and attentive mediators are available to support you in developing a satisfactory solution for all parties.
Contact usHere are a few examples of topics addressed by Chabot mediators:
- Scope of the testamentary liquidator role
- Determination of estate assets and liabilities
- Repayment of the deceased's debts
- Gift causa mortis
- Delivery of legacies
- Division of family patrimony
Why choose mediation?
Unlike a trial, where the judge focuses only on facts and must strictly apply the law, mediation gives participants much more flexibility and creativity in developing a solution. In addition to allowing the dispute to be explored as a whole, by considering the parties emotions, perceptions, values, and concerns, mediation helps preserve human relationships rather than simply deciding who has the stronger legal argument. The mediation process therefore enables the creation of a tailored solution that satisfies all participants.
Contact us
Seasoned lawyer-mediators, dedicated to resolving your disputes with attentiveness, respect, and professionalism.
Contact usSeasoned lawyer-mediators, dedicated to resolving your disputes with attentiveness, respect, and professionalism.
Me Jean-François Chabot
Founder, Lawyer, and Accredited Mediator
Expertise : Civil, commercial, workplace, and estate mediation
Mediation process
1. Establishing the mandate
The parties jointly give a professional mandate to the mediator, who can then intervene in the file and review the relevant facts. At the same time, the mediator explains the mediation process and the role they will play.
2. Review of documents
If participants have relevant documents that may enrich discussions and facilitate settlement, they should provide them to the mediator for review.
3. Pre-mediation
Each participant may have an individual pre-mediation session with the mediator. The objective is to help the mediator understand all issues surrounding the dispute, such as events that occurred, emotions involved, and each person's expectations, needs, and concerns. This helps the mediator facilitate settlement more effectively.
4. Mediation
During this meeting with all parties and the mediator present, the goal is to review the facts surrounding the dispute, identify the issues to address, and establish a structure for productive discussions. In open, transparent, and respectful exchanges, each participant can express their perspective, concerns, expectations, emotions, and questions. The mediator maintains harmony in discussions and ensures everyone has an opportunity to speak.
At any point, if requested by a party or deemed appropriate by the mediator, a caucus may be held. This allows the mediator to speak privately with one party, while informing the other that a caucus is taking place, to request clarifications or for any other legitimate reason.
Our objective is that, throughout the process, participants leave our offices feeling heard, understood, and acknowledged by one another. The dialogue phase may require more than one session depending on the needs and complexity of the situation.
5. Assessment of options and alternatives
Once the dispute issues have been discussed, each participant shares ideas and solution paths. The mediator may intervene to encourage creativity without imposing a solution. The parties then choose the option that best fits their constraints, relevant considerations, and personal preferences.
6. Mediation outcome
a) Written agreement
If the parties reach an agreement by selecting a mutually satisfactory solution, the mediator drafts a summary of the agreement. At this stage, the mediator ensures that the chosen solution respects each person's rights and freedoms, as well as public order. Participants may choose to rely on this summary, which is a contract signed by them, and perform it in good faith even though it does not yet have judgment force. They may also choose to have the document homologated by a judge, giving the agreement the force of a judgment. In that case, if one party fails to comply, the other may seek court enforcement.
b) No written agreement
If participants do not reach an agreement at the end of mediation, they may choose to initiate legal proceedings. However, they remain free to change course and attempt mediation again later. Keep in mind that information exchanged in mediation remains confidential and cannot be presented in court if legal proceedings are pursued.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is eligible to attend?
Generally speaking, only the parties to the dispute are present during mediation. With everyone’s consent, you may be accompanied during the process by a family member, a lawyer, or any other person whose input may be helpful to the smooth conduct of the process and the resolution of the dispute.
If you wish to be accompanied by a lawyer, please be aware that the lawyer’s role during a mediation session is not to speak on your behalf. The lawyer can help you evaluate new information and settlement offers and actively contribute to drafting the agreement. You may always consult a lawyer before signing an agreement.
Fees
In estate mediation, the related costs are typically borne by the executor.
It is important to note, however, that the executor is entitled to reimbursement for expenses incurred in the performance of their duties. Thus, the costs associated with estate mediation will be deducted from the total value of the estate, as the executor is not required to pay these costs out of their own pocket.
Fictional illustration of the flexibility offered in mediation
Let’s imagine a hypothetical case involving the estate of a woman worth $300. Three (3) heirs will have to divide her estate among themselves. If they were to go to court, the judge would divide the value of the estate equally, and each heir would receive a share of the estate worth $100. There would be a simple, equal division among the individuals. The judge would thus have applied a legal formula, like a perfect reproduction of a recipe.
However, if the heirs had instead chosen to negotiate through mediation, they could have created their own recipe, swapping, adding, or removing ingredients and taking other relevant factors into account, exploring the situation beyond a simple equal division. The resulting solution could thus be fairer in practice.
They could have divided the inheritance among themselves as they wished, taking into account, for example, the fact that one of them is in greater need and could receive a larger sum, the fact that one of them was a caregiver for the deceased and could receive a larger share of the inheritance as compensation for their support, the fact that some received gifts from the deceased in the past and would prefer to adjust their share of the inheritance accordingly out of fairness to the others, etc. In short, it will be possible to redesign the process to adapt it to the uniqueness of the situation.
