1 Aug 2022
The Deputy Registrar, although a non-party, was entitled to costs under r 14.1 because he was the successful opponent to the application; the concerns had been raised with the applicant prior to the application; the claimed costs were reasonable and appropriately categorised on a 2B basis, so an award of $8,484.50 plus $110.00 disbursements is justified.
29 Apr 2022
The judge refused recusal because no principled grounds or logical connection to bias existed; he admitted the extension of time for filing the notice of appeal given minimal prejudice; he denied leave to appeal and leave to adduce further evidence because the allegations of conspiracy and conflict were inherently lacking in credibility and improbable, did not disclose arguable errors of law or fact of sufficient public importance, and the interests of justice did not require further appeal.
28 Sept 2021
The Court admitted further evidence on appeal because exceptional circumstances justified it (the High Court's adverse hearsay forgery finding was determinative and risked miscarriage of justice). On the merits the additional evidence (handwriting expert, witnesses, documentary proof of English proficiency and GP notes) established the deceased had sufficient command of English, wrote and approved her will, and there was no cogent evidence of undue influence; accordingly the will dated 7 September 2016 was declared valid.
15 Oct 2020
The Court granted joinder because Fiona's legal interests were aligned with the appellant, she had been served and appeared, and it was appropriate she be heard on the appeal; the Court admitted the amended statements of claim as further evidence because the current state of the underlying proceedings is relevant to the appeal and there was no opposition; consequential evidential implications (eg new pleas of unconscionable dealing) are matters for the panel hearing the appeal.
4 Oct 2012
The application to extend time was refused because the explanation for delay was unsatisfactory, the proposed appeal was weak and in part moot given intervening events (the auction did not result in a sale and Family Court reconsideration was occurring), and justice required prompt resolution of relationship property; consequential interlocutory applications were therefore dismissed and costs awarded to the respondent.