Kordovoulos v Dixon-Hughes [2022] NSWCA 110

Kordovoulos v Dixon-Hughes [2022] NSWCA 110

Special circumstances existed under UCPR rule 51.50(1) because the appellants were impecunious, the appeal prospects were far from strong given its challenge to credit-based findings, the executors of the Estate of John Kordovoulos had not sought probate, the appellants' solicitors had a substantial contingent interest in a successful appeal through recovery of outstanding costs, and the first respondent faced a realistic risk of unrecoverable further costs. The appellants did not prove that security would stultify the appeal, particularly in the absence of evidence that their solicitors would not advance security. It was also appropriate under UCPR rule 7.10(2)(b) to appoint Vicki...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Procedural Rulings in Appeal / Notice of Motion for Security for Costs and Representation of Deceased Estate in Appeal
Outcome
Motion granted; security for costs ordered for the first respondent, proceedings stayed until security is provided, and appellants ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the application.
Legal Topics
['representation of Deceased Estate' 'security for Costs of Appeal' 'special Circumstances' 'impecuniosity' 'no Win No Fee or Contingent Fee Arrangements' 'stay Pending Security']
['civil Procedure' 'appeals' 'costs' 'estates'] ['representation of Deceased Estate' 'security for Costs of Appeal' 'special Circumstances' 'impecuniosity' 'no Win No Fee or Contingent Fee Arrangements' 'stay Pending Security']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Procedural Rulings in Appeal / Notice of Motion for Security for Costs and Representation of Deceased Estate in Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Vicki Kordovoulos should be appointed under UCPR rule 7.10(2)(b) as representative of the Estate of John Kordovoulos for the purposes of the appeal.' "Whether special circumstances existed under UCPR rule 51.50(1) warranting security for the first respondent's costs of the appeal." "Whether the appellants' impecuniosity, prospects of appeal, the executors' position, and the solicitors' fee arrangement justified an order for security." 'Whether an order for security would stultify the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Special circumstances existed under UCPR rule 51.50(1) because the appellants were impecunious, the appeal prospects were far from strong given its challenge to credit-based findings, the executors of the Estate of John Kordovoulos had not sought probate, the appellants' solicitors had a substantial contingent interest in a successful appeal through recovery of outstanding costs, and the first respondent faced a realistic risk of unrecoverable further costs. The appellants did not prove that security would stultify the appeal, particularly in the absence of evidence that their solicitors would not advance security. It was also appropriate under UCPR rule 7.10(2)(b) to appoint Vicki...

Court Disposition

Motion granted; security for costs ordered for the first respondent, proceedings stayed until security is provided, and appellants ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the application.

Orders

  • ["Pursuant to UCPR rule 51.50(1), the appellants are to provide within 14 days security in the sum of $25,000 for the first respondent's costs of the appeal either by payment of that amount into Court or in such other form as the appellants and respondents may agree in writing before that time expires." "Stay these...