What is the test for “adequate, just and equitable” in the words of the testator?

The court in Tataryn continued: If the phrase “adequate, just and equitable” is viewed in light of current societal norms, much of the uncertainty disappears. Further, two sorts of norms are available and both must be addressed. The first are the obligations which the law would impose on a person during his or her life were the question of provision for the claimant to arise. These might be described as legal obligations. The second type of norms are found in society’s reasonable expectations of what a judicious person would do in the circumstances, by reference to contemporary community standards. These might be called moral obligations, following the language traditionally used by the courts. Together, these two norms provide a guide to what is “adequate, just and equitable” in the circumstances of the case (see Tataryn v. Tataryn Estate). For further guidance in determining what is “adequate, just and equitable”, the court should next turn to the testators moral duties toward spouse and children. It is to the determination of these moral duties that the concerns about uncertainty are usually addressed. There being no clear legal standard by which to judge moral duties, these obligations admittedly more susceptible of being viewed differently by different people. Nevertheless, the uncertainty, even in this area, may not be so great as has been sometimes thought…