Reading the full decision this just gets more ridiculous. There is apparently a basis in Canadian law for allowing contemporary moral standards into an asessment of a will, which I find disturbing, but the judge in this case has latched onto that notion while completely disregarding the other standards under which a will is to be analyzed.
A good portion of the opinion discusses the incredibly strained and overall absence of a familial relationship between the father and any of the daughters. Two of the daughters spent the vast majority of their lives with virtually no relationship with their father. Despite that, most of them appear to have recieved fairly significant financial assitance at some point from their father, although any type of relationship seems to be absed strictly upon that. I don't blame the daughters, the guy sounds like a terrible father and a terrible person. However, the fact that there is a clear and reasonable basis for not including the daughters in his will is completely overlooked by the judge and replaced with his own construction of morality. A reasoned decision by the deceased to distribute his estate in a certain manner should control, and the almost complete absence of anything but a strained relationship with the daughters coupled with previous gifts provides just that.
|