Connolly v Macartney [1908] HCA 64

Connolly v Macartney [1908] HCA 64

Beneficiaries were entitled to be made parties ex debito justitiae before the judgment was drawn up and thus entitled to appeal; the Supreme Court erred in refusing to join them as parties, as the rule is procedural and the circumstances allowed for joinder.

Parties
Appellants: Connolly and others; Respondents: Macartney and others; Respondent: Jane Macartney; Trustee/executor: Beckett; Respondents: Trustees of the will of Kesterson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 1908
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Order of Hood J. in the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Joinder of Parties, Administration Action, Appeals Procedure

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Connolly and others

Appellants

Macartney and others

Respondents

Jane Macartney

Respondent

Beckett

Trustee/executor

Trustees of the will of Kesterson

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Order of Hood J. in the Supreme Court of Victoria

  1. 1 Whether cestuis que trustent (beneficiaries) should be joined as parties to an action after an adverse judgment when their trustee refuses to appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Supreme Court of Victoria had jurisdiction to add parties after judgment not yet drawn up

Ratio Decidendi

Beneficiaries were entitled to be made parties ex debito justitiae before the judgment was drawn up and thus entitled to appeal; the Supreme Court erred in refusing to join them as parties, as the rule is procedural and the circumstances allowed for joinder.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Supreme Court (Hood J.) discharged
  • Costs of all parties to be paid out of the corpus of the estate, including application costs