Thursday, September 1, 2011
Other parties interested in the will sued the two sons over the Alberta property. The trial judge ruled that "oil well rights" in the will meant freehold mines and minerals on the Alberta property. The other interested parties then appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal, arguing that the ordinary meaning of "oil well rights" could not be mines and minerals. The two sons argued that the expressed intentions of Mr. Wernicke were "clear, unambiguous and without equivocation". The mineral title in Alberta included the rights to oil beneath the ground and it was his intention that the mineral title go to the two sons. The Court of Appeal agreed.
Read the decision at: Wernicke v Quirk.