moral duty

Vigolo v Bostin [2005] HCA 11; 221 CLR 191; 213

[117] What we have said, that moral duty and moral obligation may be relevant and within the contemplation of the Act, is generally consistent with a long stream of authority in this Court. In Coates v National Trustees Executors and Agency Company Limited[104] Dixon CJ affirmed the several cases in New Zealand, the Judicial Committee and Australia which acknowledged and gave effect to moral claims. In the same case Williams J[105] referred in terms to a "moral duty" as did Webb J[106] and Kitto J[107]. Fullagar J was alone there in disparaging its utility[108]. In Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales[109] Dixon CJ (McTiernan J agreeing) again affirmed the line of authority, to which he referred in Coates, and invoked "moral duty" as an appropriate basis for provision