JS v KB & Anor (Property And Affairs Deputy for DB)

JS v KB & Anor (Property And Affairs Deputy for DB)

JS's conduct in dealing with DB's property and finances without authority, her conflict of interest, and her failure to resolve the dispute promptly justified a departure from the general rule on costs. It would be unconscionable for DB to bear the costs of litigation caused by JS's actions. JS is ordered to pay four-fifths of the deputy's costs and two-thirds of KB's costs; the balance of the deputy's costs to be paid by DB.

Parties
Applicant: JS; Respondent: KB; Respondent: MP (Property and Affairs Deputy for DB)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Court of Protection Property and Affairs / Costs Determination After Substantive Application Resolved
Outcome
Costs order against applicant (JS), departing from the general rule; partial costs to be paid by DB's estate.
Legal Topics
Deputyship, Costs Orders, Conflict of Interest, Capacity to Manage Affairs, Family Arrangements, Beneficial Interest in Property
Mental Capacity Elder Law Property Law Civil Procedure Deputyship Costs Orders Conflict of Interest Capacity to Manage Affairs +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JS

Applicant

KB

Respondent

MP (Property and Affairs Deputy for DB)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Court of Protection Property and Affairs / Costs Determination After Substantive Application Resolved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant (JS) should bear the costs of the proceedings rather than the incapacitated person (DB) or her estate
  2. 2 Whether there was a conflict of interest in JS's actions regarding DB's property and finances
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of JS and KB justified a departure from the general rule on costs in property and affairs proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

JS's conduct in dealing with DB's property and finances without authority, her conflict of interest, and her failure to resolve the dispute promptly justified a departure from the general rule on costs. It would be unconscionable for DB to bear the costs of litigation caused by JS's actions. JS is ordered to pay four-fifths of the deputy's costs and two-thirds of KB's costs; the balance of the deputy's costs to be paid by DB.

Court Disposition

Costs order against applicant (JS), departing from the general rule; partial costs to be paid by DB's estate.

Orders

  • JS to pay four-fifths of the deputy's (MP's) litigation costs to date.
  • JS to pay two-thirds of KB's litigation costs.