Cameron (AP) v MacIntrye Gibson & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSIH_53 (09 November 2006)

Cameron (AP) v MacIntrye Gibson & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSIH_53 (09 November 2006)

The pursuer and reclaimer, having succeeded, is entitled to expenses, and the defender and respondent is not entitled to charge his own or adverse expenses against the share of the estate due to the pursuer. The litigation was a competition between potential beneficiaries, not a defence of a deed or settlement by a trustee, so the general rule that expenses follow success applies.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSIH_53
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Sheila Cameron (AP) as Executor Nominate of the late Alexander Cameron formerly known as Alexander Cameron MacIntyre; Defenders and Respondents: Iain MacIntyre Gibson and another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (expenses) / Opinion of the Court (no. 2) on Expenses After Decree of Reduction
Outcome
Pursuer and reclaimer entitled to expenses; defender and respondent not entitled to charge expenses against pursuer's share of estate.
Legal Topics
Expenses in Succession Litigation, Executor's Liability for Expenses, Reduction of Adoption Order, Intestate Succession
Succession Law Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Expenses in Succession Litigation Executor's Liability for Expenses Reduction of Adoption Order Intestate Succession

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sheila Cameron (AP) as Executor Nominate of the late Alexander Cameron formerly known as Alexander Cameron MacIntyre

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Iain MacIntyre Gibson and another

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (expenses) / Opinion of the Court (no. 2) on Expenses After Decree of Reduction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the successful pursuer is entitled to expenses against the defender and respondent
  2. 2 Whether the defender and respondent (executor dative) is entitled to charge his own or adverse expenses against the share of the estate due to the pursuer

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer and reclaimer, having succeeded, is entitled to expenses, and the defender and respondent is not entitled to charge his own or adverse expenses against the share of the estate due to the pursuer. The litigation was a competition between potential beneficiaries, not a defence of a deed or settlement by a trustee, so the general rule that expenses follow success applies.

Court Disposition

Pursuer and reclaimer entitled to expenses; defender and respondent not entitled to charge expenses against pursuer's share of estate.

Orders

  • Pursuer and reclaimer awarded expenses of the action in the Inner House and Outer House (insofar as not already dealt with).
  • Defender and respondent not entitled to charge expenses for which he has been found liable, or his own expenses, against the share of the estate due to the pursuer and reclaimer.