Hutchinson v Grant

Hutchinson v Grant

Since the parties had not agreed on costs, the applications under section 50 remained live and the judge was entitled to proceed to determine the applications. There was no procedural irregularity as the judge made clear the scope of the proceedings and it was Mr Grant's choice to leave the court.

Parties
Appellant: Hutchinson; Respondent: Grant
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Removal of Administrator, Intestacy, Costs in Estate Administration, Appeal Procedure
Succession Law Civil Procedure Removal of Administrator Intestacy Costs in Estate Administration Appeal Procedure

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hutchinson

Appellant

Grant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was an agreement for the removal of both administrators and the substitution of an independent administrator to which the judge should have adhered
  2. 2 Whether the judge committed a procedural irregularity by not adhering to the alleged agreement

Ratio Decidendi

Since the parties had not agreed on costs, the applications under section 50 remained live and the judge was entitled to proceed to determine the applications. There was no procedural irregularity as the judge made clear the scope of the proceedings and it was Mr Grant's choice to leave the court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application refused