Jordan v Goldspring (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 215

Jordan v Goldspring (No 2) [2021] NSWSC 215

The conduct of the trustee defendants in resisting disclosure and their unreasonable litigation stance justified an award of 80% of the plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis to be borne by the fifth and seventh defendants without recourse to trust property; other parties to bear their own costs.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Katherine Mary Jordan; Second Plaintiff: Rhonda Fay Thomas; Third Plaintiff: Lynette June Goldspring; First Defendant: Peter Michael Goldspring; Second Defendant: Mark Andrew Goldspring; Third Defendant: Marianne Evelyn Goodchild; Fourth Defendant: Goldspring Investments PM Pty Ltd; Fifth Defendant: Goldspring's Australia PM Pty Ltd; Sixth Defendant: Goldspring's Pipelines PM Pty Ltd; Seventh Defendant: Goldspring's Equipment Hire Pty Ltd; Eighth Defendant: Goldspring's Earthmoving & Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings / Post Judgment Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs orders granted as specified; plaintiffs awarded 80% of their indemnity costs against two trustee defendants; no order as to costs for other parties.
Legal Topics
Trusts and Trustees, Disclosure of Trust Documents, Legal Costs, Indemnity Costs, Party/party Costs, Right of Trustee to Indemnity
Equity Trusts Civil Procedure Trusts and Trustees Disclosure of Trust Documents Legal Costs Indemnity Costs Party/party Costs +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Katherine Mary Jordan

First Plaintiff

Rhonda Fay Thomas

Second Plaintiff

Lynette June Goldspring

Third Plaintiff

Peter Michael Goldspring

First Defendant

Mark Andrew Goldspring

Second Defendant

Marianne Evelyn Goodchild

Third Defendant

Goldspring Investments PM Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Goldspring's Australia PM Pty Ltd

Fifth Defendant

Goldspring's Pipelines PM Pty Ltd

Sixth Defendant

Goldspring's Equipment Hire Pty Ltd

Seventh Defendant

Goldspring's Earthmoving & Heavy Haulage Pty Ltd

Eighth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings / Post Judgment Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis against certain trustee defendants
  2. 2 Which parties should bear the burden of costs for the amended Summons
  3. 3 Whether trustee defendants can recoup costs from trust property

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct of the trustee defendants in resisting disclosure and their unreasonable litigation stance justified an award of 80% of the plaintiffs' costs on an indemnity basis to be borne by the fifth and seventh defendants without recourse to trust property; other parties to bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Costs orders granted as specified; plaintiffs awarded 80% of their indemnity costs against two trustee defendants; no order as to costs for other parties.

Orders

  • Fifth and seventh defendants to pay 80% of the plaintiffs' costs, calculated on the indemnity basis, of the amended Summons filed on 9 September 2019.
  • The costs to be paid by the fifth and seventh defendants shall be without recourse to the trust property of which each is a trustee.