Heinrichs -v- Pantrust and Ors [2016] JRC 174 (30 September 2016)

Heinrichs -v- Pantrust and Ors [2016] JRC 174 (30 September 2016)

The first to third respondents, having failed in their jurisdictional challenge, refused to submit to the court's jurisdiction, and failed to comply with court orders, are liable to pay the representors' costs on the indemnity basis (except for the loans issue), as their conduct justified such an order. The representors are not entitled to costs in relation to the loans issue, as the court declined jurisdiction over that part.

Citation
[2016] JRC 174
Parties
First Representor: Anne-Marie Heinrichs; Second Representor: Werner Cornelius Heinrichs; First Respondent: Pantrust International SA; Second Respondent: Richard George De Winton Wigley; Third Respondent: James Richard De Winton Wigley; Fourth Respondent: G. B. Trustees Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
30 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Trusts Costs Judgment / Post Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs awarded to the first and second representors on the indemnity basis (except for the loans issue); payment on account ordered.
Legal Topics
Trustee Removal, Jurisdiction, Costs (indemnity/standard), Supervisory Jurisdiction Over Trusts
Trusts Civil Procedure Trustee Removal Jurisdiction Costs (indemnity/standard) Supervisory Jurisdiction Over Trusts

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne-Marie Heinrichs

First Representor

Werner Cornelius Heinrichs

Second Representor

Pantrust International SA

First Respondent

Richard George De Winton Wigley

Second Respondent

James Richard De Winton Wigley

Third Respondent

G. B. Trustees Limited

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Trusts Costs Judgment / Post Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the representors are entitled to indemnity costs from the first to third respondents
  2. 2 Whether the first to third respondents are entitled to costs
  3. 3 Whether the conduct of the first to third respondents justifies indemnity costs

Ratio Decidendi

The first to third respondents, having failed in their jurisdictional challenge, refused to submit to the court's jurisdiction, and failed to comply with court orders, are liable to pay the representors' costs on the indemnity basis (except for the loans issue), as their conduct justified such an order. The representors are not entitled to costs in relation to the loans issue, as the court declined jurisdiction over that part.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded to the first and second representors on the indemnity basis (except for the loans issue); payment on account ordered.

Orders

  • First to third respondents to pay the costs of the first and second representors (excluding the loans issue) on the indemnity basis up to and including the April hearing and the costs hearing.
  • First to third respondents to make a payment on account of £100,000 to the first and second representors within 28 days.