Short answer. A fairly wide window. Rule 91, Section 2 requires the court to set a hearing not more than six months after the order, and to direct that the order be published once a week for six successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province the court considers best.

What the law says

the court, by an order reciting the purpose of the petition, shall fix a date and place for the hearing thereof, which date shall be not more than six months after the entry of the order, and shall direct that a copy of the order be published before the hearing at least once a week for six successive weeks in some newspaper of general circulation published in the province, as the court shall deem best.

Rule 91, Section 2 — Order for hearing. Read the full provision →

Screening the petition first

Before any of this happens, the petition itself has to be sufficient in form and substance. Only once that threshold is met does the court proceed to set a hearing, so a defective petition does not automatically trigger the publication machinery described in the rest of the section. This screening step keeps the notice-and-publication process from being triggered by a petition that would not survive scrutiny in the first place.

A capped hearing date

The hearing date the court fixes must be not more than six months after the entry of the order. That ceiling gives any heir who later learns of the case, or who is searching for a missing relative's estate, a reasonably predictable window in which the matter will actually be decided. It also keeps the government's escheat petition itself from stalling indefinitely once the court has found it sufficient.

The six-week publication requirement

Notice by publication is mandatory: the order must be published at least once a week for six successive weeks in some newspaper of general circulation published in the province, as the court shall deem best. Six weeks of repeated publication is a meaningfully longer notice period than a single announcement would provide, increasing the odds that an heir who does not regularly read that particular newspaper still encounters the notice at some point during the run.

Why publication substitutes for personal notice

Because escheat proceedings arise precisely when no known heir can be identified, the rule cannot rely on serving notice on named individuals. Publication is the mechanism that gives an unknown or unlocated heir a real, if indirect, chance to learn of the case and come forward before the estate is finally adjudicated. Requiring repeated publication over six weeks, rather than a single notice, is the rule's way of compensating for the fact that no one can be personally served when no heir has yet been identified.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.