Consult a Vancouver Unfair Wills Variation Lawyer if you are concerned that your spouse or parent made inadequate provision for you as a spouse or as a child in their BC Will. Time limits apply so take immediate action to prevent having your claim dismissed as time limit barred. Different approaches and rules apply to claims by spouses as compared to Will variation claims made by adult children. Contact an experienced MacLean Law Vancouver Unfair Wills Variation Lawyer today toll free to meet with us across BC at 1-877-602-9900.
Vancouver Unfair Wills Variation Lawyer 604-602-9000
In Enns v Gordon the court reviewed the law on the strength of claims by adult children was governed by WESA section:
60 Despite any law or enactment to the contrary, if a will-maker dies leaving a will that does not, in the court’s opinion, make adequate provision for the proper maintenance and support of the will-maker’s spouse or children, the court may, in a proceeding by or on behalf of the spouse or children, order that the provision that it thinks adequate, just and equitable in the circumstances be made out of the willmaker’s estate for the spouse or children.
[AND ]….in Hall v. Hall, 2011 BCCA 354, the court stated the following in relation to claims by adult independent children:
 With specific reference to the claims of adult independent children, the Court [in Tataryn] stated a testator will not generally have a legal duty to an adult independent child unless the child contributed to the estate. As to moral obligations toward adult children, these are tenuous, but may justify entitlement if the size of the estate is adequate and the circumstances do not negate such an obligation.
Vancouver Unfair Wills Variation Lawyer – Adult Child Factors To Consider
Lorne N MacLean, QC , Vancouver Unfair Wills Variation Lawyer, The Justice in Ennbs also noted that Dunsdon v. Dunsdon, 2012 BCSC 1274, also provides a useful summary of the test, as well as a list of considerations in the context of a claim by an adult independent child:
 The concept of adequate provision is a flexible notion and is highly dependent upon the individual circumstances of the case. The adequacy of a provision is measured by asking whether a testator has acted as a judicious parent or spouse, using an objective standard informed by current societal legal and moral norms. The considerations to be weighed in determining whether a testator has made adequate provision are also relevant to the determination of what would constitute adequate, just and equitable provision in the particular circumstances.…
 In the post-Tataryn era, the following considerations have been accepted as informing the existence and strength of a testator’s moral duty to independent children:
- relationship between the testator and claimant, including abandonment, neglect and estrangement by one or the other;
- size of the estate;
- contributions by the claimant;
- reasonably held expectations of the claimant;
- standard of living of the testator and claimant;
- gifts and benefits made by the testator outside the will;
- testator’s reasons for disinheriting;
- financial need and other personal circumstances, including disability, of the claimant;
- misconduct or poor character of the claimant;
- competing claimants and other beneficiaries:
 These considerations tend to overlap and are not approached in isolation as independent, air-tight categories.
 Given Elizabeth’s passing, it is also necessary to note the legal principles applicable to wills variation claims by estates. In that regard, death does not disentitle an estate to relief, but it is a circumstance that may be considered in determining what is just and equitable: Pelletier v. Erb Estate, 2002 BCSC 1158 at para. 63.