His argument is assisted by the decision of Mr. Justice Belzil in Brooks v. Stefura. Mr. Justice Belzil did not confine deductions of expenses to living expenses of the deceased. He made further deductions for future obligations he found the deceased would have incurred had he not died. However, in doing so he stated a significant factor in the case before him was the presence of a dependency claim which had to be first deducted from the gross value of the estate. The deduction necessarily contained a factor of known expenditure on the dependant children and spouse. Further, he made other deductions factually on finding that it was probable the deceased would have fathered more children than he already had, and on the basis of evidence that prior to his death the deceased had made a number of purchases of items such as motorcycles and electronic equipment, which in turn required bank financing. On that basis Justice Belzil found it highly probable that, but for the deceased's death, he would have continued the same lifestyle which would have entailed incurring debts. He found this to be over and above ordinary family debt and, it was on these facts he found an 80% reduction against future earnings to be appropriate.
"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.