KARA KAR HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS v KNUDSEN & ANOR (No 2) [2002] NSWCA 37

KARA KAR HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS v KNUDSEN & ANOR (No 2) [2002] NSWCA 37

No miscarriage of the trustee's discretion was established beyond the initial payment of $115,000; as the relevant undertakings addressed this, judgment should be for the defendants on the Statement of Claim. Remitter was unnecessary as no live issues necessitated further determination at first instance; costs should generally follow the event, with specific exceptions for prior proceedings as set out in the orders.

Parties
Appellants: KARA KAR HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS; Respondents: Neils Knudsen & ANOR
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Remitter on Costs and Final Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed; prior orders set aside; judgment for defendants; costs orders as specified.
Legal Topics
Construction of Trust Deed, Exercise of Trustee's Discretion, Costs
Equity Trusts Construction of Trust Deed Exercise of Trustee's Discretion Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KARA KAR HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS

Appellants

Neils Knudsen & ANOR

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Remitter on Costs and Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should remit further issues to the trial judge or make final orders
  2. 2 Proper answers to stated questions concerning beneficiaries' entitlements under trust deed
  3. 3 Appropriate costs orders given reversal of trial decision

Ratio Decidendi

No miscarriage of the trustee's discretion was established beyond the initial payment of $115,000; as the relevant undertakings addressed this, judgment should be for the defendants on the Statement of Claim. Remitter was unnecessary as no live issues necessitated further determination at first instance; costs should generally follow the event, with specific exceptions for prior proceedings as set out in the orders.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; prior orders set aside; judgment for defendants; costs orders as specified.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The orders of Austin J made on 9 and 19 October 2000 are set aside.