What is the legal burden of proving that there is undue influence in the preparation and execution of a will?

The applicant’s position is a stretch, not only on the evidence but also in light of the issue that was ordered to be tried. The applicant relies on jurisprudence dealing with testamentary capacity and draws analogies from cases dealing with suspicious circumstances surrounding the preparation and execution of a will: Vout v. Hay 1995 CanLII 105 (SCC), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 876 (S.C.C.); Scott v. Cousins [2001] O.J. No. 19 (S.C.J., Cullity J.). In those cases it was stated that the person propounding the will has the legal burden of proof of due execution, knowledge and approval and testamentary capacity and the person opposing probate has the legal burden of proving undue influence. Once the person opposing probate has introduced well-grounded evidence of suspicious circumstances, the legal burden of proof shifts to the propounder of the will who reassumes the legal burden of proving knowledge and approval.