Ritchie & Ors v Joslin & Ors [2009] EWHC B7 (Ch) (03 April 2009)

Ritchie & Ors v Joslin & Ors [2009] EWHC B7 (Ch) (03 April 2009)

The court held that, given the evidence and the nature of the claim, NOS's costs should be paid out of the estate until the date of service of Dr Mahapatra's report, after which there should be no order as to costs between NOS and the Claimants. The proprietary estoppel claim's partial failure justified not awarding full costs to the Claimants. The Part 36 offer was too low relative to the estate's value and did not make it unreasonable for NOS to continue the litigation; thus, it would be unjust to apply the usual Part 36 costs consequences.

Citation
[2009] EWHC B7 (Ch)
Parties
Claimants: Jimmy and Willie; Executors: Mr Joslin and Mr Brock; Defendant: NOS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Contentious Probate / Post Trial Costs Judgment With Permission to Appeal Granted
Outcome
Costs order: NOS's costs payable out of the estate until service of Dr Mahapatra's report; thereafter, no order as to costs between NOS and Claimants; no indemnity by NOS for executors' costs. Permission to appeal granted to both sides on costs order.
Legal Topics
Costs in Probate Litigation, Testamentary Capacity, Part 36 Offers, Proprietary Estoppel
Probate Civil Procedure Costs in Probate Litigation Testamentary Capacity Part 36 Offers Proprietary Estoppel

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jimmy and Willie

Claimants

Mr Joslin and Mr Brock

Executors

NOS

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Contentious Probate / Post Trial Costs Judgment With Permission to Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate order for costs in contested probate proceedings
  2. 2 Application of CPR Part 36 in probate litigation
  3. 3 Effect of partial success on proprietary estoppel claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, given the evidence and the nature of the claim, NOS's costs should be paid out of the estate until the date of service of Dr Mahapatra's report, after which there should be no order as to costs between NOS and the Claimants. The proprietary estoppel claim's partial failure justified not awarding full costs to the Claimants. The Part 36 offer was too low relative to the estate's value and did not make it unreasonable for NOS to continue the litigation; thus, it would be unjust to apply the usual Part 36 costs consequences.

Court Disposition

Costs order: NOS's costs payable out of the estate until service of Dr Mahapatra's report; thereafter, no order as to costs between NOS and Claimants; no indemnity by NOS for executors' costs. Permission to appeal granted to both sides on costs order.

Orders

  • NOS's costs payable out of the estate until date of service of Dr Mahapatra's report
  • No order as to costs between NOS and Claimants after that date