Walker v. McDermott

Walker v. McDermott

The court held that under R.S.B.C. c.256 s.3 the judge may order provision that is adequate, just and equitable after assessing the testator's estate, the claimant's circumstances and competing claims; on the facts the trial judge was justified in finding the will did not make adequate provision for the daughter and in ordering an allowance (court restored trial judge's order: $6,000 less $1,000 already paid).

Citation
[1931] SCR 94
Parties
Appellant/petitioner: Pearl Walker; Respondent/defendant: Ida McDermott
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 October 1930
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court (Morrison J.) restored.
Legal Topics
Testator's Family Maintenance Act, Will Interpretation, Provision for Dependents, Judicial Discretion in Maintenance Orders
Source Language
English
Estates Succession Family Law Testator's Family Maintenance Act Will Interpretation Provision for Dependents Judicial Discretion in Maintenance Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pearl Walker

Appellant/petitioner

Ida McDermott

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / On Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the will made adequate provision for proper maintenance and support of the testator's child under R.S.B.C. c.256 s.3
  2. 2 How to interpret 'proper maintenance and support' and 'adequate, just and equitable' in making an order under the Act
  3. 3 Scope of appellate review of discretionary maintenance orders

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that under R.S.B.C. c.256 s.3 the judge may order provision that is adequate, just and equitable after assessing the testator's estate, the claimant's circumstances and competing claims; on the facts the trial judge was justified in finding the will did not make adequate provision for the daughter and in ordering an allowance (court restored trial judge's order: $6,000 less $1,000 already paid).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of trial court (Morrison J.) restored.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed with costs in the Court of Appeal and in this Court.
  • Judgment of Morrison J. restored.