In my view, this really is the crux of this decision. I am keenly aware that the decision in this case prevents me with the same dilemma as was faced by Rutherford J. in the decision in Mouaga where he stated: “There is no satisfying the wishes of both sides by any decision that I have been able to conceive in the circumstances…” I am also keenly aware as noted by Farley J. in Abeziz v. Harris Estate[6] that there is no legal right in a corpse, there are only obligations. As he noted in that case, the fundamental obligation is that the body be appropriately dealt with, that is disposed of in a dignified fashion. I further adopt he comments in that case where he noted: “The appreciation of this distress means that the task of this decision is very painful for me.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.