Serving documents.
While a lawyer might consider the strategic implications of serving documents at a later stage, they are bound by ethical standards and professional conduct rules. Deliberately delaying service to create a pyrrhic effect and deter interested parties from engaging in the administration of the estate could be seen as unethical and potentially harmful.
In the estate I am witnessing, the probate lawyer served the P2 package for the Estate Grant five months after the registrar signed the probate grant. This stealthy behaviour is concerning. The P2 package should have been served on the interested parties before it was filed in the probate registry. The probate lawyer might say that you, as an interested party, can still voice your displeasure, but it may fall on deaf ears. Bringing this matter to court would be a Pyrrhic victory—not worth the trouble.
At one point, I was threatened by the lawyers that they were going to get me, and it appears they have succeeded. I was never told why they wanted to get me. Maybe being old is the reason. I do not know. I am going to have to spend my modest inheritance to prove they engaged in stealthy behavior, even though it would probably result in a Pyrrhic victory. It would be up to me to apply at my own cost to the court. While I would likely win, at what cost? Improper service could be addressed after the estate grant was sealed, but to what purpose? The court would probably instruct the parties to re-serve the information, which feels akin to shooting the messenger.
What a way to bring disrepute to the legal process—using the system to get someone. But then no one would know about it except me, and the lawyers, as I would not do anything about it because of the Pyrrhic effect.
