Karpin v Karpin [1999] NSWSC 335

Karpin v Karpin [1999] NSWSC 335

Because the second defendant perceived that his professional relationship with the Master more than thirty years earlier ended on less than good terms, the Master considered it proper to disqualify himself and vacate the hearing before him. However, because the defendants had expressly raised no objection when the relationship was disclosed and the hearing was fixed, the unnecessary application and resulting expense and inconvenience were caused by the first and second defendants, who should pay the plaintiff's costs of the application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 April 1999
Procedural Posture
Claim for Relief Pursuant to Division 6 of Part 4 of the Conveyancing Act 1919, Including Appointment Under Section 66 G of Statutory Trustees for Sale of Real Property / Application by the First and Second Defendants That the Master Disqualify Himself From Hearing the Matter
Outcome
The Master disqualified himself, vacated the hearing fixed before him, and ordered the first and second defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application with leave to proceed forthwith to assessment.
Legal Topics
['statutory Trustees for Sale' 'judicial Disqualification' 'reasonable Apprehension of Bias' 'costs']
['equity' 'property Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['statutory Trustees for Sale' 'judicial Disqualification' 'reasonable Apprehension of Bias' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Claim for Relief Pursuant to Division 6 of Part 4 of the Conveyancing Act 1919, Including Appointment Under Section 66 G of Statutory Trustees for Sale of Real Property / Application by the First and Second Defendants That the Master Disqualify Himself From Hearing the Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Master should disqualify himself from hearing the matter on the ground of perceived bias arising from a prior professional relationship with the second defendant.' 'Whether the plaintiff should receive costs of the disqualification application where the defendants had previously raised no objection to the Master hearing the matter.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the second defendant perceived that his professional relationship with the Master more than thirty years earlier ended on less than good terms, the Master considered it proper to disqualify himself and vacate the hearing before him. However, because the defendants had expressly raised no objection when the relationship was disclosed and the hearing was fixed, the unnecessary application and resulting expense and inconvenience were caused by the first and second defendants, who should pay the plaintiff's costs of the application.

Court Disposition

The Master disqualified himself, vacated the hearing fixed before him, and ordered the first and second defendants to pay the plaintiff's costs of the application with leave to proceed forthwith to assessment.

Orders

  • ['I order that the hearing specially fixed before me for Thursday, 15 April be vacated.' "I order that the cost of the plaintiff of today's application be paid by the first and second defendants." 'I grant leave to the plaintiff to proceed forthwith to assessment of the foregoing costs.']