Michael Lumb v Stuart Lumb

Michael Lumb v Stuart Lumb

The Judge at first instance erred in finding that there were reasonable grounds for opposition when none of the grounds raised by the Defendant had any real prospect of success or could undermine the validity of the will. The costs protection under CPR r57.7(5) did not apply because the grounds were not reasonable. Therefore, the usual rule that costs follow the event applied, and the Defendant was ordered to pay the Claimant's costs.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Michael Lumb; Defendant/respondent: Stuart Lumb
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Probate Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; costs order set aside; costs to follow the event.
Legal Topics
Costs in Probate Proceedings, Summary Judgment, Testamentary Capacity, Knowledge and Approval, CPR R57.7(5), Appeals
Probate Civil Procedure Costs in Probate Proceedings Summary Judgment Testamentary Capacity Knowledge and Approval CPR R57.7(5) Appeals

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Lumb

Claimant/appellant

Stuart Lumb

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Probate Appeal / Appeal From Costs Order After Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy District Judge erred in making no order as to costs under CPR r57.7(5) after granting summary judgment in favour of the validity of the will
  2. 2 Whether the grounds raised by the Defendant amounted to 'reasonable grounds' for opposing the will under CPR r57.7(5)(b)
  3. 3 Whether the usual rule that costs follow the event should apply

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge at first instance erred in finding that there were reasonable grounds for opposition when none of the grounds raised by the Defendant had any real prospect of success or could undermine the validity of the will. The costs protection under CPR r57.7(5) did not apply because the grounds were not reasonable. Therefore, the usual rule that costs follow the event applied, and the Defendant was ordered to pay the Claimant's costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; costs order set aside; costs to follow the event.

Orders

  • Deputy District Judge’s costs order set aside.
  • Defendant to pay Claimant’s costs on the standard basis.