What is the testamentary duty of a parent toward a child?

The testamentary duty of a parent toward a child was described in Walker v. McKermott (1931), 1930 CanLII 1 (SCC), S.C.R. 94 at 96: What constitutes “proper maintenance and support” is a question to be determined with reference to a variety of circumstances. It cannot be limited to the bare necessities of existence. For the purpose of arriving at a conclusion, the court of whom devolves the responsibility of giving effect to the statute, would naturally proceed from the point of view of the judicious father of a family seeking to discharge … his parental duty; and would of course (looking at the matter from that point of view), consider the situation of the child, … and the standard of living to which, having regard to this and the other circumstances, reference ought to be had. If the court comes to the decision that adequate provision has not been made, then the court must consider what provision would be not only adequate, but just and equitable also; and in exercising its judgment upon this, the pecuniary magnitude of the estate, and the situation of others having claims upon the testator, must be taken into account.

What constitutes an “adequate” testamentary provision for a child was expanded upon in Tataryn v. Tataryn, 1994 CanLII 51 (SCC), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 807, where the court included both a legal and moral obligation by a testatrix toward her children. The moral obligation was described by McLachlin J. (now C.J.C.) at 814: … most people would agree that an adult dependent child is entitled to such consideration as the size of the estate and the testator’s other obligations may allow. While the moral claim of independent adult children may be more tenuous, a large body of case law exists suggesting that, if the size permits and in the absence of circumstances which negate the existence of such an obligation, some provision for such children should be made.