Pegler & Ors v McDonald & Anor (Re Estate of Clive McDonald) [2022] EWHC 2288 (Ch) (06 September 2022)

Pegler & Ors v McDonald & Anor (Re Estate of Clive McDonald) [2022] EWHC 2288 (Ch) (06 September 2022)

The defendant's application was dismissed because the claim for removal of executor disclosed a cause of action with real prospects of success, there was no abuse of process or procedural failure by the claimants, the allegations of bias did not meet the objective test for recusal, and there was no sufficient reason to change the trial date or time.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2288 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Karen Pegler; Claimant: Tamara Sarah Stringer; Claimant: Serena Juliet Gahagan Hulme; Claimant: Jeremy Edwin Stanley Gahagan; Defendant: Timothy Bruce McDonald; Defendant: Hugh James Trust Corporation Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (removal of Executor) / Interlocutory Application (summary Dismissal, Recusal, Adjournment)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Removal of Executor, Summary Judgment, Recusal of Judge, Adjournment of Trial, Civil Restraint Orders
Probate Civil Procedure Removal of Executor Summary Judgment Recusal of Judge Adjournment of Trial Civil Restraint Orders

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 4 Authorities cited 34 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karen Pegler

Claimant

Tamara Sarah Stringer

Claimant

Serena Juliet Gahagan Hulme

Claimant

Jeremy Edwin Stanley Gahagan

Claimant

Timothy Bruce McDonald

Defendant

Hugh James Trust Corporation Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (removal of Executor) / Interlocutory Application (summary Dismissal, Recusal, Adjournment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for removal of executor should be summarily dismissed
  2. 2 Whether the judge should recuse himself for bias
  3. 3 Whether the trial date or time should be changed

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's application was dismissed because the claim for removal of executor disclosed a cause of action with real prospects of success, there was no abuse of process or procedural failure by the claimants, the allegations of bias did not meet the objective test for recusal, and there was no sufficient reason to change the trial date or time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Defendant's informal application for summary dismissal, recusal, and change of trial time is dismissed.