Pat Quinn was a giant as a player on the ice, as an executive in the Canucks front office, and behind the bench as a coach for several teams.

But things were not quite so clear cut with the Big Irishman's will, which was created 18 years before his sudden death on November 23, 2014.

That's because a clause in the will has been declared invalid by B.C. Supreme Court justice Gordon Funt. 

And it's not "cured" by B.C.'s Wills, Estates and Succession Act, according to Funt's ruling.

"At the time of his death, his Canadian assets consisted primarily of shares in the capital of several private corporations," Funt wrote in his decision. "Subject to the resolution of a particular liability, the value of the deceased’s estate is either near nil or approximately $750,000."

The court ruling involving Quinn's estate notes that his will was prepared by an unnamed U.S. attorney and executed in B.C.

A family trust was created prior to the execution of the will, which named Quinn and his wife as the "first beneficiaries" should one of them die.

The trust also stipulated that following the death of the surviving spouse, the beneficiaries would be the two daughters, Kathleen and Valerie.

In the court hearing, two separate lawyers represented Quinn's widow, Sandra, in her role as the executor and in her personal capacity.

Different lawyers represented Kathleen and Valerie.

Quinn and his wife were trustees of the Quinn Family Trust.

A year after he executed his will, the trust was amended. This was to ensure it conformed to U.S. regulations for a "qualified domestic trust".

A pour-over clause, which directs that assets subject to the will be "poured over" into an existing trust upon the death of the willmaker, was declared invalid by Funt.

That's because the trust could be amended later without complying with execution requirements under provincial law.

"A pour-over clause is generally viewed as 'a dispositive provision directing that all or part of the estate should be added to the corpus of an existing trust, the terms of which were not reiterated in the will itself'," Funt wrote, citing trusts and estates expert Alan N. Polasky. 

Sandra Quinn also sought a court ruling on whether this would "cured" by section 58 of the B.C.'s Wills, Estates and Succession Act. 

Funt ruled that section 58 of this legislation does not apply in this instance.

"The result is that the residue of the deceased estate will be distributed on intestacy in accordance with Part 3 of WESA," the judge wrote.

Investopedia defines intestacy  as dying "without having made a will explicitly stating how you wish your assets to be distributed".

The WESA includes a section on the disposition of assets when there's a spouse and descendants and no will. It includes a declaration that household furnishings go to the spouse.

In addition, the widow receives the first $300,000 of value, plus half of any remaining assets beyond that. Each daughter would receive one quarter of any amount in excess of $300,000.