Lawyer Profile

Richard J. Worsfold

Toronto, Ontario

Overview

Richard Worsfold

Richard is pleased to bring his over 30 years of litigation experience to Mills & Mills LLP as a Counsel. Richard’s work involves acting as an advocate for his clients as well as acting as a mediator assisting in the settlement of disputes through alternate dispute resolution.

Richard’s litigation practice has included a wide variety of complex matters, including Will challenges, shareholders’ rights disputes, traffic fatality cases, incapacity issues and wrongful dismissal claims. Richard has appeared in Courts at all levels in Ontario and has become well respected by the Courts and his fellow advocates.

Richard now concentrates his litigation practice in Estate Litigation. Richard takes a practical and efficient approach to Estates litigation, attempting to move disputes efficiently to resolution. He is able to quickly identify the key disputes in a matter and takes a creative approach to resolution, always moving matters forward to a successful conclusion.

Richard is a firm believer in the mediation/negotiation process and as a mediator he works tirelessly to assist litigants resolve their disputes in a fair and respectful manner.

Recent Court Decisions

Hospital For Sick Children v. Nicholas et al, 2024 – Decision of the Superior Court of Ontario. Successfully obtained an Order removing Estate Trustees of an Estate where allegations of conflict of interest and financial mismanagement led the Court to appoint alternate Trustees.

Corion v. Corion, 2022 – Decision of the Superior Court of Ontario in a Guardianship matter where Richard successfully represented a brother and sister who sought an Order requiring their sibling to return their mother who had dementia to Canada for treatment.

Jung v. Ye, 2022 – Decision of the Superior Court of Ontario dismissing an Application brought by a dissident group in a Not-For-Profit client of Richard’s seeking to wrest control of the group and review actions of the executive.

Kates Estate, 2020 – Decision following a Superior Court of Ontario trial. Successfully defended a will challenge on behalf of a group of 20 charities who were beneficiaries of the Estate, rebutting allegations of lack of capacity and undue influence.

Wong v. Li, 2020 – Superior Court of Justice trial. Successfully defended action alleging breach of fiduciary duty, conspiracy and fraud. Action dismissed with costs in favour of our client.

Martin v. Martin (Martin Estate), 2018 – Superior Court decision clarifies the issue of the evidentiary threshold requirement for Will challengers.

58 Cardill Inc. v. Rathcliffe Holdings et al, 2017 – Superior Court decision with respect to interpretation of a mortgage and enforceability of three months’ interest penalty clause.

58 Cardill Inc. v. Rathcliffe Holdings et al., 2018 – Court of Appeal decision upholding the Superior Court decision.

Arrow ESP Norway v. Tian, 2017 – Court of Appeal decision upholding decision regarding tracing of funds in international e-mail fraud matter.

Mishev v. Shah, 2016 – Superior Court trial decision dismissing claim alleging fraud against mortgagee.

Articles

Removing an Estate Trustee: How Bad Is Bad Enough?
The Power of an Apology in Mediation
Beneficiary Designations: Are They Now Safe?
Courts Reluctant to Interfere in Operations of Not-For-Profit Corporations
Mediation in the Age of Zoom – is there any going back?
How Close is Close Enough?
Will Challenge Litigation Costs: When Should You Team Up?
The importance of keeping good notes
Ad hoc fiduciary duties and equitable fraud
Deciding when duties of power of attorney start
Laying the groundwork for admission of expert evidence
Undue influence and testamentary fraud: both sides of the coin
Three months’ interest penalty – is it payable?
Getting pre-retirement death benefits when left out of the will
Pre-Retirement Death Benefits available to satisfy a Dependant’s Relief Claim
YouTube and broadcasting: Applying Libel and Slander Act to Internet
Employers taking creative approaches to mitigation
Early mediation requirements buried under backlog

Media

Interview with CBC

Practice Areas

Bar Information

Called to the bar: 1985 (ON)