McCool v McCool [2008] NSWSC 748

McCool v McCool [2008] NSWSC 748

Ross McCool was not substantially successful because he obtained none of the relief sought in the statement of claim. The alleged irregularities, apart from the omission of cricket memorabilia from the inventory, were minor and carping, and the omission of the memorabilia caused no risk to the estate or possible loss to Ross McCool because the brothers had agreed they would be held in trust. Once the defence explained the irregularities, it should have been obvious that the matters raised were unlikely to show that proper administration of the estate had been jeopardised or prevented. Russel McCool was therefore entitled to costs, charged against Ross McCool's remaining entitlement in the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Action to Revoke Probate and Seek Letters of Administration With the Will Annexed / Costs Determination After Issues Between the Parties Were Largely Resolved
Outcome
Statement of claim dismissed. Plaintiff ordered to pay defendant's costs, charged on plaintiff's remaining entitlement in the estate.
Legal Topics
['probate Revocation' 'administration of Estate' 'executor Conduct' 'costs Following the Event' 'inherent Jurisdiction to Revoke Probate']
['procedure' 'succession' 'costs'] ['probate Revocation' 'administration of Estate' 'executor Conduct' 'costs Following the Event' 'inherent Jurisdiction to Revoke Probate']

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

Action to Revoke Probate and Seek Letters of Administration With the Will Annexed / Costs Determination After Issues Between the Parties Were Largely Resolved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff was substantially successful despite not obtaining the orders sought in the statement of claim.' 'Whether alleged irregularities in the probate application and estate administration justified the commencement or continuation of the proceedings for costs purposes.' "Whether the defendant should have his costs paid by the plaintiff and charged against the plaintiff's remaining estate entitlement." 'The proper approach to deciding costs where proceedings have not carried to adjudication on the merits.']

Ratio Decidendi

Ross McCool was not substantially successful because he obtained none of the relief sought in the statement of claim. The alleged irregularities, apart from the omission of cricket memorabilia from the inventory, were minor and carping, and the omission of the memorabilia caused no risk to the estate or possible loss to Ross McCool because the brothers had agreed they would be held in trust. Once the defence explained the irregularities, it should have been obvious that the matters raised were unlikely to show that proper administration of the estate had been jeopardised or prevented. Russel McCool was therefore entitled to costs, charged against Ross McCool's remaining entitlement in the...

Court Disposition

Statement of claim dismissed. Plaintiff ordered to pay defendant's costs, charged on plaintiff's remaining entitlement in the estate.

Orders

  • ['The statement of claim is dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of the proceedings." "The plaintiff's remaining entitlement to part of the estate is charged with the order as to costs."]