Application for further provision from estate — moral obligation — breach of moral duty — proper maintenance and support — Family Protection Act 1955, s 4 — Little v Angus [1981] 1 NZLR 126 — Williams v Aucutt [2002] 2 NZLR 479 — Vincent v Lewis (2006) 25 FRNZ 714 — Henry v Henry [2007] NZCA 42 — Flathaug v Weaver [2003] NZFLR 730 — Fisher v Kirby [2013] NZFLR 463. The applicant had made an application against the estate of his late father, claiming that he had breached his moral duty and seeking further provision from his estate. The testator had left his estate to his three children and seven grandchildren. The applicant was left 15 per cent of the total residue after specific gifts and estate expenses, which worked out to be 13 per cent of the total estate. The respondents submitted that this satisfied the moral duty to the applicant. The applicant submitted that he should receive roughly a third of the total estate, citing the fact that he lived in a state home, received a government benefit, had significant student loan debt and had a variety of health issues that prevented him from maintaining steady work. The parties agreed that there was a moral duty owed to the applicant, but were not in agreement that the provision left to him was a breach of the moral duty. The Court found that the testator did breach his moral duty to the applicant to make a provision to address any future medical needs that the applicant may have. The Court ordered that the applicant receive a specific bequest of $50,000 on top of the 15 per cent of residue he had already received. This worked out to be 17 per cent of the total value of the estate. Judgment Date: 21 August 2023.