Crociani -v- Crociani [2015] JRC 178 (01 September 2015)

Crociani -v- Crociani [2015] JRC 178 (01 September 2015)

Given the trustee's conflict of interest, lack of independent consideration of the beneficiary's request, and the unresolved merits of the substantive claim, it would be unjust to make a costs order against the plaintiffs at this stage; costs are reserved to the trial judge.

Citation
[2015] JRC 178
Parties
First Plaintiff: Cristiana Crociani; Second Plaintiff: Delia Crociani; Third Plaintiff: Livia Crociani; First Defendant: Madame Crociani; Second Defendant: Mr Paul Foortse; Third Defendant: BNP Paribas Jersey Trust Corporation Limited; Fourth Defendant: Appleby Trust (Mauritius) Limited; Sixth Defendant: Camilla Crociani; Sixth Defendant: Camillo Crociani Foundation Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
01 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Trust Litigation / Costs Determination Following Withdrawal of Pre Emptive Costs Application
Outcome
Costs reserved to the trial judge; no order for costs at this stage.
Legal Topics
Pre Emptive Costs Orders, Trustee Duties, Beneficiary Rights, Costs Following Withdrawal, Jurisdictional Issues, Conflict of Interest in Trustees
Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Pre Emptive Costs Orders Trustee Duties Beneficiary Rights Costs Following Withdrawal Jurisdictional Issues Conflict of Interest in Trustees

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cristiana Crociani

First Plaintiff

Delia Crociani

Second Plaintiff

Livia Crociani

Third Plaintiff

Madame Crociani

First Defendant

Mr Paul Foortse

Second Defendant

BNP Paribas Jersey Trust Corporation Limited

Third Defendant

Appleby Trust (Mauritius) Limited

Fourth Defendant

Camilla Crociani

Sixth Defendant

Camillo Crociani Foundation Limited

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trust Litigation / Costs Determination Following Withdrawal of Pre Emptive Costs Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs should be awarded and on what basis following withdrawal of a pre-emptive costs application by beneficiaries against trustees and former trustees
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the trustees and former trustees justified indemnity costs
  3. 3 Whether the application for pre-emptive costs was justified given the trust's illiquidity and the beneficiaries' position

Ratio Decidendi

Given the trustee's conflict of interest, lack of independent consideration of the beneficiary's request, and the unresolved merits of the substantive claim, it would be unjust to make a costs order against the plaintiffs at this stage; costs are reserved to the trial judge.

Court Disposition

Costs reserved to the trial judge; no order for costs at this stage.

Orders

  • Costs arising out of the application are reserved to the trial judge.