While informal verbal agreements may seem convenient and cost-effective at the time they are made, they all-too-frequently lead to disputes down the road.
Curated Content Related Resources

Informal Verbal Agreements Frequently Lead to Estate Disputes

Clark Wilson LLP
By Polly Storey and Mackenzie Do
January 21st, 2026

Estate planners and litigators often encounter families who have made informal verbal agreements about how assets are to be dealt with…

While oral agreements may seem convenient and cost-effective at the time they are made, they all-too-frequently lead to disputes down the road. Where relationships change within the family, a party to the agreement may later deny the terms of an agreement, or even its very existence. Even where an agreement is admitted, memories may fade or differences of opinion may arise regarding the terms of the agreement.

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of British Columbia, in the McRae v. McCrae case, serves as a reminder that oral agreements can be valid and enforceable as an estate planning tool. However, parties should be cautious if they choose not to reduce an agreement to writing.

Such agreements invite uncertainty, even where the existence of an agreement is not disputed. Where evidence is not available to support that an agreement was made or to provide certainty as to its terms, a party may be left disappointed.

Written agreements, which set out the terms agreed to, are the most effective and reliable way to ensure that estate planning intentions are carried out, and to minimize the risk of costly and contentious disputes.