Image via WikipediaOne of the sacrosanct pillars of Canadian law, custom, and culture is that a man's will is a man's will.
A guy dies and gives all his money to his son, leaving his four daughters with nothing. Was this wrong? Perhaps. Unjust? Sounds like it. Was this guy mean and wicked? Maybe. Was it his money, and therefore his right to do so? Yes.
Until the leftist Canadian judiciary steps in.
The B.C. Supreme Court judge overturned the man’s will, saying his estate should be settled based on ‘‘contemporary moral standards’’ -- meaning the judge's or the state's shifting moral standards, not the individual's.
Apparently it's only your money if you spend it the right way. Otherwise, it's the state's money. Which really means it isn't yours at all -- it's only yours as long as you spend it the right way and the state allows you to have it. (Kind of like the studies which show how much it "costs" the government to let you keep some of your money by tax deductions.)
The son, who would have been free to do what he saw fit with the money, including redressing his father's unjust action (if that is what it was) will now receive 20% of his father’s assets. His lawyer is considering an appeal.
The man could have given his son all this money the day before he died, or, he could have given it all to charity, or he could have donated it all to the Canadian Supreme Court Justices Benevolent Fund and that is the point of a will -- it expresses your will and is supposed to be carried out after your death.
I feel for the daughters, but I'm holding the line on this one. What do you think?
Update: For more on BC's law, and how it varies with Canadian common law, go here.