The closest living relatives of an 84-year-old B.C. widow who left her $1 million estate to a much-younger “professional companion and male escort” have been given the go-ahead to challenge the will, according to a recently published court ruling.

Janet Henry executed her final will and testament in August of 2021, three months before she died, leaving the “bulk of her estate” to a man named Simon Garstin, the court heard.

Jillian and Ross Sutherland McCrone, Henry’s niece and nephew, are seeking to have the will overturned, which would open the door for them to potentially inherit the money.

“The thrust of the plaintiffs’ claim is that the deceased was subjected to undue influence by Mr. Garstin,” a decision handed down in B.C. Supreme Court on June 12 explained.

“A presumption of undue influence is established when the nature of the relationship between the parties demonstrates the potential for domination. To rebut the presumption, (the deceased) must be shown to have prepared his or her will of his or her own full, free and informed thought.”

The decision explained that Henry had no children and her husband died 17 years before she did.

“Following her husband’s death, the deceased apparently enjoyed retaining and paying for the services of various male escorts for the purpose of companionship and sexual services,” Justice Gary P. Weatherill wrote.

Henry and Garstin met online via Skype in February of 2021 and in person for the first time in April, the decision said. Over the next six months, the pair had a number of “overnight visits,” meeting in-person for the last time when Garstin stayed at Henry’s home for three nights in October.

“The sexual and companionship services Mr. Garstin provided were paid for by the deceased at agreed upon prices which were not insignificant,” the decision said.

The relatives’ notice of civil claim argues that the will should be set aside because Henry was vulnerable and lonely – particularly due to COVID-19 restrictions in place at the time – and that her relationship with Garstin was a transactional one where he was “in a position of dominance and control,” according to the decision.

Garstin, in his response, argued that the opposite was true. His claim said Henry was an “independent single woman who enjoyed his company on her terms,” adding that the fact that Henry paid him made him financially dependent on her – meaning “the deceased was in a position of dominance over him.”

The case is set to go to trial at the end of the month, but Garstin was asking the judge to strike the relatives’ claim entirely on a number of grounds, including that there was “no triable issue” and that the niece and nephew’s claim was “doomed to fail.”

Weatherill found the question of undue influence was one that should be decided at trial, and said some evidence – namely, text messages that disclosed through the discovery process – seemed to support the relatives’ allegations.

“Undue influence can be established through circumstantial evidence upon which inferences can be drawn. Inferences can be drawn from such things as the approximate 54-year difference in the ages between Mr. Garstin and the deceased,” he wrote.

“The text messages in evidence arguably suggest that the deceased and Mr. Garstin had more than a casual sexual relationship and the deceased may have been influenced by him. Those issues will need to be determined on the merits after fulsome evidence and cross-examination,” the judge concluded.