Can an Unsigned or Electronic Will Be Valid in Ontario?

Updated September 8, 2026 · Legally reviewed by Jaspreet Kaur Daley, Ontario Lawyer

A person meets with a lawyer, gives instructions and receives a draft will. The signing appointment is booked. Before it happens, the person dies.

Which document governs the estate?

In Ontario, an unsigned document is not automatically treated as a valid will. In a suitable case, however, the Superior Court of Justice may validate a document that was not signed or witnessed correctly. The court must be satisfied that the document genuinely records the deceased person’s settled testamentary intentions.

An electronic-only document raises an additional question. Ontario Superior Court decisions currently disagree about whether a file that existed only on a computer or in an email can be validated at all. The Court of Appeal for Ontario has not resolved that issue on its merits.

The safest course remains the simplest one: complete the planning process and sign the will properly while your instructions and capacity are clear.

What does Ontario law normally require?

Ontario’s Succession Law Reform Act sets the ordinary requirements for a formal will. Subject to limited exceptions, the will must be in writing, signed at its end by the testator or by another person acting in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction, and witnessed by two people in the manner required by the legislation.

A document that does not meet those requirements may be invalid unless another rule applies. That can mean an earlier will remains in effect or, if there is no valid will, the estate is distributed under Ontario’s intestacy rules.

What can section 21.1 fix?

Section 21.1 of the Succession Law Reform Act came into force on January 1, 2022. It applies where the deceased died on or after that date.

The section allows the Superior Court of Justice to declare that a document or writing is valid and fully effective even though it was not properly executed or made under the Act. It can also apply to a defective attempt to revoke, alter or revive a will.

The power is discretionary. The word used in the legislation is “may.” A missing signature or witness does not become irrelevant simply because a court has the power to grant relief.

Ontario decisions generally focus on two central questions:

1. Is the document authentic?
2. Does it record the deceased person’s deliberate, fixed and final intention about the disposition of property on death?

The person seeking validation bears the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities. The inquiry is highly dependent on the facts and the available evidence.

An unsigned document and an electronic-only document are not the same thing

These terms are sometimes used as if they mean the same thing, but they describe different problems.

An unsigned document could be a physical paper, a handwritten note or a printed lawyer’s draft that was never signed. The lack of a signature is an execution defect. Ontario courts have validated some unsigned physical documents where the surrounding evidence clearly established authenticity and final testamentary intention. For example, in Kertesz v. Kertesz, 2023 ONSC 7055, the court validated an unsigned handwritten note prepared by a person who knew death was imminent.

An electronic-only document is a file that never existed in physical form at the relevant time, such as a Word document stored on a computer or a PDF attached to an email. It may also be unsigned, but its electronic form creates a separate statutory issue under section 21.1(2) and Ontario’s Electronic Commerce Act, 2000.

This distinction matters. A case about an unsigned paper document does not necessarily answer whether an electronic-only document can be considered.

What evidence matters when a will was never signed?

A label such as “final draft” is not decisive. The court examines what the deceased actually did, knew and communicated.

Relevant evidence may include:

• whether the deceased personally reviewed the exact document;
• whether the deceased clearly approved or adopted it;
• whether questions, corrections or choices remained open;
• whether the deceased had booked a signing appointment;
• why the signing did not occur;
• whether the document was signed, dated, handwritten or witnessed in any way;
• whether an earlier valid will exists;
• whether the proposed document makes major changes to an earlier plan;
• the drafting lawyer’s file, correspondence and attendance notes;
• evidence about capacity, coercion or undue influence; and
• the document’s custody and digital or physical history.

A lawyer may have followed instructions accurately and still produced only a draft. Instructions to prepare a will are evidence of a plan. They do not necessarily prove that the client adopted the completed draft as a final testamentary act.

What did the Court of Appeal decide in Hejno v. Hejno?

Hejno v. Hejno, 2025 ONCA 876 is Ontario’s leading appellate decision on section 21.1 to date.

The deceased had a properly executed 2018 will. He later signed primary and secondary wills in 2022 before only one witness, which did not satisfy the ordinary execution requirements. In 2024, new drafts were prepared but never signed. The application judge validated the 2024 drafts on an unopposed application and gave no reasons.

The Court of Appeal set that order aside and declared the 2024 drafts invalid. The drafting lawyer’s evidence showed that the deceased remained undecided about aspects of his plan. Unsigned and uninitialled replacement pages also contained inaccurate shareholding information.

The Court of Appeal emphasized that an unopposed application still requires judicial scrutiny. A court must be satisfied that a document truly expresses the deceased person’s testamentary wishes. It also confirmed that validation is a fact-intensive inquiry that may require testimony and credibility findings.

The Court of Appeal did not establish a complete legal test for every section 21.1 application. It returned the question of the defectively witnessed 2022 wills to the Superior Court for a full hearing.

Why did the court reject the draft in Smith v. Bechtel?

In Smith v. Bechtel, 2026 ONSC 975, the deceased met with an experienced lawyer and gave instructions for a will and Powers of Attorney. The lawyer prepared the documents and asked the client to review them before a scheduled signing appointment. The client died unexpectedly before the appointment.

The court refused to validate the draft will. There was no evidence that the deceased had reviewed the draft. A handwritten list found after death contained similar general intentions, but there were notable differences between that list and the lawyer’s document. The lawyer’s covering letter also invited corrections, and the time for providing those corrections had not expired.

The court distinguished an expression of intention from a fixed and final testamentary intention. Clear instructions to a lawyer were not enough on the evidence in that case.

Are electronic wills valid in Ontario?

Ontario law does not provide a simple way to make a formally valid will merely by saving a document electronically, typing a name or applying an electronic signature.

Section 21.1(2) of the Succession Law Reform Act says that the court’s validation power is subject to section 31 of the Electronic Commerce Act, 2000. Section 31 excludes wills and codicils from the Act’s electronic-document rules.

Ontario judges disagree about whether those provisions only prevent a person from using electronic equivalency rules to create a will, or whether they also prevent a court from validating an electronic-only document after death.

Madhani v. Fast: an electronic-only draft could not be validated

In Madhani v. Fast, 2025 ONSC 4100, the proposed will existed only as an electronic Word document. The deceased died on the morning of the scheduled signing appointment.

The court held that section 21.1 could not validate a testamentary document that existed only in electronic form. It also found, in the alternative, that the evidence did not prove the document was the deceased person’s deliberate, fixed and final testamentary expression. There was no evidence that the deceased had reviewed or approved the exact final draft.

Gebremariam v. Menghesha: a different interpretation

In Gebremariam v. Menghesha, 2026 ONSC 545, an unsigned electronic document titled “Nabute’s Will” was attached to an email with the subject line “Please be my witnesses.”

On a preliminary motion, the court disagreed with Madhani. It held that the Electronic Commerce Act cannot be used to treat an electronic document or electronic signature as automatically satisfying the formal requirements for a will. The court nevertheless concluded that the two statutes do not categorically prohibit an application to validate an electronic document under section 21.1 where other evidence establishes the requirements for relief.

This was not a final ruling that the attachment was a valid will. Important questions remained, including whether the deceased sent the document, whether he had testamentary capacity and whether the document should ultimately be validated.

The attempted appeal was quashed in Menghesha v. Gebremariam, 2026 ONCA 364 because the order was interlocutory. The Court of Appeal did not decide the electronic-will issue on its merits.

Samide v. Taylor: the restrictive approach followed

In Samide v. Taylor, 2026 ONSC 3589, the deceased left a valid 2013 paper will and a 2024 draft stored only on his computer. The later document was never printed, signed or witnessed.

The court agreed with Madhani and held that an electronic-only testamentary document could not be validated under section 21.1. It also found, in the alternative, that the document was not proved to be a fixed and final expression of testamentary intention. The deceased had made changes to an earlier draft and had left the later document unsigned for about four months despite having the opportunity to sign it.

The 2013 will remained the operative will. A separate dependant’s support claim was left outstanding.

What is the current answer for electronic-only wills?

As of August 30, 2026, the most accurate answer is that the law remains unsettled at the Superior Court level:

• Madhani and Samide say section 21.1 cannot validate a will that existed only electronically.
• Gebremariam says there is no categorical prohibition, but the electronic document must still satisfy section 21.1 through evidence independent of the electronic equivalency rules.
• The Court of Appeal has not decided which interpretation is correct.
• No court in the decisions discussed above treated a saved file, typed name or electronic signature as automatically creating a valid Ontario will.

People should not rely on a Word file, PDF, email, text message or electronic signature as a completed Ontario will. Even if a future court accepts the more permissive interpretation, the estate may still face a contested court application about authenticity, capacity and final intention.

Is remote witnessing the same as an electronic will?

No. Ontario permits the presence requirements for witnessing to be met through audio-visual communication technology when the statutory conditions are followed.

At least one witness must be a licensee within the meaning of the Law Society Act. The making or acknowledgment of the testator’s signature and the witnesses’ subscribing of the will must be contemporaneous. Complete, identical copies may be signed in counterpart and together constitute the will.

Remote witnessing does not mean that an unsigned PDF or an electronic signature is enough. A video call by itself does not complete a will.

Can section 21.1 repair an unsigned Power of Attorney?

No. Section 21.1 is a Will-validation provision and cannot itself validate a defectively executed Continuing Power of Attorney for Property or Power of Attorney for Personal Care. Other legal issues or remedies, if any, depend on the facts and require advice about the particular document.

A Will controls applicable estate matters after death. Powers of Attorney address authorized decisions during life. A complete plan often needs both.

What can a section 21.1 application involve?

Validation is a court proceeding, not a routine paperwork correction. Depending on the dispute, it may involve:

• affidavits from the drafting lawyer, family members and other witnesses;
• disclosure of the lawyer’s file and private correspondence;
• production of prior wills, notes and drafts;
• forensic evidence about electronic records;
• medical and capacity evidence;
• notice to every person whose financial interest may be affected;
• cross-examinations or a contested evidentiary hearing; and
• additional cost and delay before the estate can be administered.

Section 21.1 can prevent a technical mistake from defeating a genuine testamentary decision. It should not be treated as a substitute for completing the will properly.

How can you avoid leaving an unfinished estate plan?

1. Review the final document, not only the initial instructions.
2. Resolve every outstanding question before the signing appointment.
3. Sign the Will using the formalities that apply in Ontario.
4. Complete both Powers of Attorney at the same time.
5. Store the original documents safely and tell the appropriate person where they are located.
6. Review beneficiary designations, jointly owned property and business interests alongside the Will.
7. Update the plan after major changes instead of leaving revised drafts unfinished.

Mand Daley Law’s Family Protection Plan helps suitable Ontario couples complete coordinated Wills and Powers of Attorney through a lawyer-led process. The package includes planning, individualized drafting, document review and coordinated signing.

What to preserve before asking for legal advice

If the concern is an unfinished or disputed document, preserve the complete document, the email or message that transmitted it, the drafting history and any instructions about changes. Do not edit the file, add a signature or discard earlier versions.

Tell the lawyer whether the person is alive, whether capacity or urgency is a concern, and whether an earlier signed Will or Power of Attorney exists. Those steps do not establish that the document is legally effective; they help preserve the evidence needed for advice.

Our guide to mobile Wills and Powers of Attorney in the GTHA explains why a phone or Zoom review is not automatically the same thing as executing a Will or Power of Attorney electronically.

Finish the plan while the decision is yours

An unfinished will can leave a family trying to prove a person’s intentions after that person can no longer explain them. The result may depend on an earlier will, Ontario’s intestacy rules or a court application supported by evidence that is incomplete or disputed.

If your Will is still a draft, or your existing plan no longer fits your family, property or wishes, take the final step and complete it properly.

Technology supports our lawyers. It does not replace them.

Book a Free 15-Minute Consultation. Choose phone or Zoom.

Frequently asked questions

Is an unsigned Will automatically valid in Ontario?

No. An unsigned document does not satisfy the ordinary execution requirements. The Superior Court of Justice may validate some defective documents under section 21.1, but only after considering the document and the surrounding evidence. The outcome is discretionary and fact-specific.

Can an unsigned paper Will be validated?

Possibly. Ontario courts have validated some unsigned physical documents where authenticity and fixed, final testamentary intention were established. A lawyer’s unapproved draft is not automatically the client’s Will.

Is a Will attached to an email valid in Ontario?

Not merely because it was emailed. Ontario judges currently disagree about whether an electronic-only document can ever be validated under section 21.1. In every case, strong evidence of authenticity and settled testamentary intention would still be required.

Does approving a draft by email make it a Will?

Email approval can be relevant evidence, but it does not automatically satisfy Ontario’s signing requirements. A court would examine the precise communication, the document approved, the entire drafting history and whether any decisions remained open.

Can the beneficiaries agree to treat an unsigned draft as the Will?

Their agreement does not itself turn the draft into a valid Will. The court must independently determine whether section 21.1 applies. Other estate arrangements may sometimes be available, but their legal and tax consequences require case-specific advice.

Can section 21.1 validate an unsigned Power of Attorney?

No. Section 21.1 applies to Wills and attempts to revoke, alter or revive them. It cannot itself validate a defectively executed Power of Attorney.

Legal information notice

This article provides general information about Ontario law as of September 8, 2026. It is not legal advice and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. The law may change, and the result in any case depends on the documents, evidence and procedural circumstances. Anyone dealing with a potentially invalid Will should obtain advice from an Ontario estates lawyer.