A Ltd v J (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 931

A Ltd v J (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 931

Given both parents were necessary and interested parties, neither party adopted an unreasonable position, there was a public interest in allowing interested parties to be heard, and the Child's estate was substantial. It was appropriate that the first and second defendants' costs be paid on a solicitor/client basis out of the estate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Equity / Determination of Costs Following Orders for a Statutory Will
Outcome
Costs of each of the first and second defendant be paid on the solicitor/client basis out of the Child's estate.
Legal Topics
['costs' 'statutory Wills' 'protective Jurisdiction']
['equity' 'succession'] ['costs' 'statutory Wills' 'protective Jurisdiction']

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

Equity / Determination of Costs Following Orders for a Statutory Will

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether costs of first and second defendants should be paid out of the Child's estate and on what basis"]

Ratio Decidendi

Given both parents were necessary and interested parties, neither party adopted an unreasonable position, there was a public interest in allowing interested parties to be heard, and the Child's estate was substantial. It was appropriate that the first and second defendants' costs be paid on a solicitor/client basis out of the estate.

Court Disposition

Costs of each of the first and second defendant be paid on the solicitor/client basis out of the Child's estate.

Orders

  • ["The costs of each of the first and second defendant be paid on the solicitor/client basis out of the Child's estate."]