Green v Astor & Ors

Green v Astor & Ors

Where a beneficiary's unreasonable conduct causes substantial costs in an application for directions by a trustee or personal representative, the court may order that those costs be borne by that beneficiary rather than the estate. The costs referable to the Partition Agreement and third parties claims are to be paid by Mr Astor, while costs referable to the Tomlin Order claim are to be borne by Mrs Green.

Parties
Claimant/applicant: Christine Mary Green; Defendant/respondent: Richard Joseph Astor; Defendant/respondent: Timothy Michael Maitland; Defendant/respondent: Christopher James Maitland; Defendant/respondent: Phillipa Jane Graham; Defendant/respondent: Michael Henry Gartside Neville; Defendant/respondent: Battersea Dogs Home; Defendant/respondent: Kidney Research UK
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (trust/estate Administration) / Judgment on Costs Following Substantive Resolution
Outcome
Costs apportioned: Mrs Green to bear her own and 15% of Mr Astor's costs for the Tomlin Order claim; Mr Astor to pay 85% of Mrs Green's costs for the Partition Agreement and third parties claims; costs to be assessed on the standard basis.
Legal Topics
Beddoe Applications, Costs Orders, Trustee Indemnity, Beneficiary Conduct, Partition Agreements
Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Beddoe Applications Costs Orders Trustee Indemnity Beneficiary Conduct Partition Agreements

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christine Mary Green

Claimant/applicant

Richard Joseph Astor

Defendant/respondent

Timothy Michael Maitland

Defendant/respondent

Christopher James Maitland

Defendant/respondent

Phillipa Jane Graham

Defendant/respondent

Michael Henry Gartside Neville

Defendant/respondent

Battersea Dogs Home

Defendant/respondent

Kidney Research UK

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (trust/estate Administration) / Judgment on Costs Following Substantive Resolution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who should bear the costs of the application by the administrator of the estate?
  2. 2 Was the administrator entitled to court approval for entering into the Partition Agreement?
  3. 3 Should the administrator be obliged to pursue claims against third parties?

Ratio Decidendi

Where a beneficiary's unreasonable conduct causes substantial costs in an application for directions by a trustee or personal representative, the court may order that those costs be borne by that beneficiary rather than the estate. The costs referable to the Partition Agreement and third parties claims are to be paid by Mr Astor, while costs referable to the Tomlin Order claim are to be borne by Mrs Green.

Court Disposition

Costs apportioned: Mrs Green to bear her own and 15% of Mr Astor's costs for the Tomlin Order claim; Mr Astor to pay 85% of Mrs Green's costs for the Partition Agreement and third parties claims; costs to be assessed on the standard basis.

Orders

  • Mrs Green to bear her own costs and 15% of Mr Astor's costs referable to the Tomlin Order claim.
  • Mr Astor to pay 85% of Mrs Green's costs referable to the Partition Agreement and third parties claims.