GIUSEPPINA PRAGER-MACHOL V SUSAN MICHELL AND ROSS RICHARD STUHLMANN AS EXECUTORS AND TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF ANGELA LEGGETT HC AK CIV 2010-404-000917

GIUSEPPINA PRAGER-MACHOL V SUSAN MICHELL AND ROSS RICHARD STUHLMANN AS EXECUTORS AND TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF ANGELA LEGGETT HC AK CIV 2010-404-000917

Balancing the plaintiff's demonstrated impecuniosity (partly self-created by gifts), her overseas residence, the uncertain merits requiring more evidence, and the need to protect defendants from unjustified expense, the Court exercised its discretion to order a modest security for costs of $12,000 to be paid into...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-f7057f01_46ae_4d0f_9bf8_614633b9cf5b.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Giuseppina Prager-Machol; Defendant/applicant (executor and Trustee of the Estate of Angela Leggett): Susan Michell; Defendant/applicant (executor and Trustee of the Estate of Angela Leggett): Ross Richard Stuhlmann
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Testamentary Promises Claim (estate Litigation) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs
Outcome
Security for costs ordered (interlocutory)
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Testamentary Promises, Legal Aid, Impecuniosity, Enforcement of Costs Judgments Overseas
Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Costs Security for Costs Testamentary Promises Legal Aid Impecuniosity Enforcement of Costs Judgments Overseas

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Giuseppina Prager-Machol

Plaintiff/respondent

Susan Michell

Defendant/applicant (executor and Trustee of the Estate of Angela Leggett)

Ross Richard Stuhlmann

Defendant/applicant (executor and Trustee of the Estate of Angela Leggett)

Procedural Posture

Testamentary Promises Claim (estate Litigation) / Interlocutory Application for Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether security for costs should be ordered given the plaintiff's residence outside New Zealand
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is impecunious and unable to meet an adverse costs order
  3. 3 Assessment of the merits of a testamentary promises claim at interlocutory stage

Ratio Decidendi

Balancing the plaintiff's demonstrated impecuniosity (partly self-created by gifts), her overseas residence, the uncertain merits requiring more evidence, and the need to protect defendants from unjustified expense, the Court exercised its discretion to order a modest security for costs of $12,000 to be paid into Court, with leave to apply for review if legal aid is granted and costs reserved.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered (interlocutory)

Orders

  • Security fixed at $12,000 to be paid into Court and held in an interest bearing account pending further order of the Court
  • Leave reserved to the plaintiff to apply to review the security order if she is granted legal aid