TL;DR: A codicil is a formal legal document used to amend, supplement, or partially revoke specific provisions of an existing will without replacing it entirely.
A codicil is a formal legal document used to amend, supplement, or partially revoke specific provisions of an existing Will without replacing it entirely. To be valid, a codicil must meet the same execution requirements as a Will — it must be signed by the will-maker in the presence of two witnesses, who must also sign in the will-maker’s presence. Critically, a codicil must clearly reference and confirm the underlying Will it modifies; without that express confirmation, the codicil can, in some circumstances, be treated as revoking the original Will altogether — not merely amending it.
In British Columbia, codicils were most commonly used during the era governed by the Wills Act, RSBC 1996, c. 489 (now repealed). Under that legislation, the definition of “will” expressly included a codicil: “will” includes a testament, a codicil, an appointment by will or by writing in the nature of a will in exercise of a power and any other testamentary disposition. WESA carries forward a similar definition. While the Wills Act has been replaced by the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, SBC 2009, c. 13 (“WESA”), a Will or codicil executed under the old regime is not invalidated by the transition — its formal validity is assessed under the rules that applied when it was made. For estates of will-makers who died on or after March 31, 2014, however, WESA governs how those documents are interpreted and administered.
Why Codicils Were Made
The practical reason codicils existed was rooted in the physical realities of legal drafting before computers. Wills were typed on legal-sized onion skin paper — thin, fragile, and unforgiving. Under the Wills Act, a Will that had been altered by correction fluid, crossing out, or interlineation could face serious interpretation problems. If the will-maker’s intent was unclear from the face of the document, the alteration could render provisions void or trigger court scrutiny.
That left practitioners with two options when a change was needed: retype the entire Will from scratch — perfectly, on that same unforgiving paper — or draft a codicil addressing only the specific change. A codicil replacing, say, the executor clause was far shorter and carried far less opportunity for error than retyping a complex multi-page Will in its entirety.
The Risks of Multiple Codicils
Will-makers sometimes accumulated many codicils over the years. In practice, it was not unusual to see a Will accompanied by three, four, five, or even seven codicils, each addressing a different change made at a different point in life.
This created significant complexity. Each codicil had to correctly reference and confirm every prior document in the chain. If Codicil No. 5 failed to account for a change already made by Codicil No. 3, the result could be duplicative or conflicting provisions. If Codicil No. 6 did not expressly revoke the relevant provisions of Codicil No. 2, both might stand — creating ambiguity that a court would have to resolve. Sorting out these errors after the will-maker’s death was not straightforward and often required a court order, a process that remains true today under WESA.
The Problem of Missing Codicils
Because codicils were separate physical documents, they were vulnerable to loss — accidental or deliberate. A beneficiary unhappy with the contents of a codicil could simply make it disappear. If it was discovered that a codicil had been made and then lost, the result was a dispute: did the will-maker destroy it intentionally (which could be treated as revocation), or did someone else destroy it (which would not be)? Proving which scenario occurred, years after the fact and after the will-maker’s death, is an obvious evidentiary challenge.
There was an additional and serious complication: because a codicil, once made, formed part of the overall testamentary package — and because the definition of “will” under both the old Wills Act and WESA includes a codicil — destroying a codicil without properly revoking it raises the question of whether the underlying Will was also revoked. If a court found that the destruction of the codicil amounted to revocation of the entire testamentary package, the will-maker could be treated as having died without a valid Will at all.
Why Practitioners Were Cautious About Codicils on Another Drafter’s Will
A codicil does not stand alone — it is only as sound as the Will it amends. A BC Notary or lawyer asked to draft a codicil on a Will prepared by someone else faces a problem: they cannot verify whether the original document was properly executed, whether the will-maker had testamentary capacity at the time, or whether there were undue influence or suspicious circumstance concerns. If the underlying Will was flawed or void, the codicil built on top of it is equally compromised — and the practitioner who prepared it may be drawn into the resulting dispute.
For this reason, many practitioners declined to prepare codicils amending Wills they did not draft, or would do so only after conducting the same full review of the underlying document that they would apply to a Will they were preparing from scratch.
When a Codicil May Still Be Useful
While codicils have largely fallen out of use, there are narrow circumstances where they remain a practical tool. One example arises in deathbed Will situations. If a BC Notary or lawyer attends a will-maker whose capacity is uncertain, they may begin with a simple, basic Will — capturing the essential testamentary intentions clearly and without complexity. If the will-maker demonstrates sufficient capacity to address more complex matters, additional provisions can then be added by way of a codicil. This staged approach ensures the will-maker always has some valid testamentary document in place, while allowing the practitioner to build in greater sophistication only where capacity clearly supports it.
Codicils Today: A Relic of Another Era
Outside of narrow situations like the one above, codicils are almost never used in modern practice. Word processing has eliminated the physical constraints that made them necessary. Producing a clean, complete, properly executed new Will takes no more time than preparing a codicil — and avoids every risk associated with maintaining a multi-document testamentary package: the chain-referencing complexity, the risk of inconsistency, the security concerns around safekeeping multiple originals, and the practitioner liability questions that come with amending someone else’s work.
If your circumstances have changed and your Will needs updating, the answer in virtually every case is a new Will — not a codicil. A new Will replaces the old one entirely and gives you a single, coherent document that speaks clearly to your current wishes.
A Real-Life Example
Imagine a will-maker who executed her Will in 1978, appointing her husband as executor and sole beneficiary. Over the following decades, she made three codicils: one in 1985 removing a specific bequest, one in 1991 adding a grandchild as a beneficiary, and one in 2003 changing her alternate executor. When she passed away in 2024, her estate lawyer reviewed the package and found that the 2003 codicil had failed to expressly confirm and ratify the underlying Will and the two earlier codicils. Because a codicil forms part of the overall testamentary package — and a new codicil can, depending on its wording, be treated as revoking what came before — there was now a serious question about whether the 2003 codicil had invalidated not just the prior codicils but the 1978 Will itself. If the original Will was no longer operative, the estate could not simply proceed under it. A court application was required to determine the validity of the entire testamentary package — an outcome that would have been entirely avoidable had a new Will been prepared in 2003.
Frequently Asked Questions
A handwritten (holograph) codicil is not automatically valid in BC. Under WESA, a Will — including any document that functions as one — must generally be signed by the will-maker in the presence of two witnesses who also sign. A holograph codicil that has not been properly made and witnessed may be considered by a court under WESA’s curative provisions (s. 58) if the court is satisfied it represents the will-maker’s testamentary intentions, but this is uncertain and requires a court application. The safe approach is to always have a codicil properly prepared and witnessed.
A properly drafted codicil amends or revokes specific provisions of your existing Will while leaving the rest intact — it does not replace the Will as a whole. However, a codicil that fails to clearly reference and confirm the underlying Will can, in some circumstances, be treated as revoking the entire testamentary package, not just the provisions it addresses. This is one of the most significant risks associated with codicils, and one of the key reasons that simply making a new Will is almost always the better approach.
Almost certainly a new Will. A Will made in 1990 was drafted under the old Wills Act. While it remains legally operative, updating it with a codicil requires careful review of the original document for execution defects, capacity concerns, and internal consistency. In virtually every case, making a new Will is simpler, safer, and no more expensive. A BC Notary or lawyer can advise you on the right approach for your situation.
The consequences depend on whether the missing codicil can be proven to have existed and what it said. If the codicil cannot be located, a court may presume the will-maker destroyed it with the intention of revoking it — and because a codicil forms part of the overall testamentary package, that finding can put the validity of the underlying Will in question as well. Proving what actually happened requires evidence that is difficult to assemble after the will-maker has died.
Rarely, but yes. One situation where a codicil may be appropriate is a deathbed Will: if a will-maker’s capacity is uncertain, a practitioner may begin with a simple foundational Will and add more complex provisions by codicil only if capacity clearly supports it. This staged approach ensures some valid testamentary document is always in place. Outside of circumstances like this, a new Will is almost always the right answer — it is no more difficult to prepare, and eliminates all of the chain-referencing and consistency risks that a codicil package carries.