By Jacqueline M. Demczur and Urshita Grover

In the Horley Estate decision, released on June 18, 2025, the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia addressed an important question about charitable bequests. In its decision, the court concluded that even though the named parish beneficiary of a bequest had amalgamated and no longer owned the building referenced in the testator’s will, the bequest should be directed to its amalgamated successor parish to uphold the testator’s intent, with the cy-près doctrine available as an alternative basis to achieve the same result.

The case arose from the Will of Deryl Sandra Horley, who passed away in September 2023. In her Will, Ms. Horley directed that one-third of the residue of her estate be distributed to the “SAINT MATTHIAS ANGLICAN CHURCH of Halifax, Nova Scotia, to be used for the upkeep and restoration of the building.” However, by the time of her death, the Parish of Saint Matthias had sold its property (including the church building known as Saint Matthias Anglican Church) (“Original Parish”) and, in 2011, amalgamated with the Parish of St. Philip to form the Parish of the Anglican Church of the Apostles (the “Amalgamated Parish”). This raised the questions of (i) whether the testamentary gift should go to the Original Parish if it continued to legally exist; (ii) whether the said gift should pass to the Amalgamated Parish as its successor (i.e. “the representative of the associated or group of organizations that include Saint Matthias”), (iii) whether the gift could be saved under the cy-près doctrine, or (iv) whether the gift would fail entirely and revert to the estate through intestacy.

The court began by examining whether the Saint Matthias Anglican Church still existed as a legal entity. While the name “Saint Matthias Anglican Church” was commonly used, it was not the name of the legal entity which actually owned the building referenced in the testator’s Will, which was the Original Parish. However, the court determined that this was not an issue of concern.

The court then considered whether the Amalgamated Parish could be considered the “successor” to the Saint Matthias Anglican Church (as part of the Original Parish). Unlike situations where a charity is dissolved without continuity, the court found that the Original Parish and Parish of St. Philip had voluntarily amalgamated under the Anglican Church Act, transferring all assets and congregational functions to the Amalgamated Parish. This created clear organizational continuity and, on this basis, the court held that the Amalgamated Parish was the proper successor to receive the bequest.

Although the question of successorship resolved the matter, the court also addressed the potential application of the cy-près doctrine to this situation, which allows courts to direct charitable gifts “as near as possible” to the donor’s original intent when literal compliance is impossible, i.e. it is otherwise “impossible to say which institution is intended to benefit” from the gift. The court emphasized that Ms. Horley’s gift was unconditional and her primary intention was to support her worship community and ensure the upkeep of the congregation’s place of worship.

Since the congregation formerly associated with Saint Matthias Anglican Church (as part of the Original Parish) now worships at the location of the Amalgamated Parish, the court determined that the bequest would have followed the congregation under cy-près principles even if no legal successor existed. Ultimately, the court ordered that the one third residue of Ms. Horley’s estate be distributed to the Amalgamated Parish.

This decision underscores the need for testators (and their legal counsel) to regularly confirm the status of charitable beneficiaries as these types of organizations often amalgamate, dissolve or change names over time. To avoid similar disputes and resulting uncertainty, it is advisable to include language such as “or its successor organization” in Wills when naming charitable beneficiaries, as well as for a charity itself to ensure clear organizational integrity if it plans to merge or amalgamate with another charity(ies). In addition, this decision shows how courts will strive to uphold a testator’s charitable intent by recognizing successor organizations and, where appropriate, applying the cy-près doctrine, so that testamentary gifts are carried out in a manner consistent with the testator’s wishes.

​Read the August 2025 Charity & NFP Law Update