McDowell v McDowell [1918] HCA 10

McDowell v McDowell [1918] HCA 10

There was no ground for prohibition as the objection regarding jurisdiction went only to the merits of the plaintiff's cause of action, not to the existence of County Court jurisdiction; the Supreme Court was correct in refusing prohibition.

Parties
Appellant: William John McDowell; Appellant: Samuel McDowell; Respondent: John McDowell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 March 1918
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of County Court, Execution of Trusts
Civil Procedure Equity Jurisdiction of County Court Execution of Trusts

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William John McDowell

Appellant

Samuel McDowell

Appellant

John McDowell

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal From the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the County Court had jurisdiction to hear a suit involving the alleged execution of a trust where the trust estate exceeded £500 under sec. 121 of the County Court Act 1915 (Vict.)
  2. 2 Whether prohibition should issue to restrain the County Court from determining the matter

Ratio Decidendi

There was no ground for prohibition as the objection regarding jurisdiction went only to the merits of the plaintiff's cause of action, not to the existence of County Court jurisdiction; the Supreme Court was correct in refusing prohibition.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.