Tasmanian Perpetual Trustees Ltd v Bell

[2010] TASSC 1

Supreme Court of Tasmania

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Succession
2. › Wills, probate and administration
3. › Probate and letters of administration
4. › Revocation of grant of letters of administration with will annexed
5. › Costs
6. › Whether administrator had reasonably arguable case
7. › Whether language of testator was unclear
8. › Administrator seeking personal benefit
9. › Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932 (Tas), s 12
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Indemnity costs
4. › Whether defence of proceedings ought not to have been undertaken
5. › Whether case was patently hopeless
6. › Whether ulterior motive or wilful disregard of known facts
7. › Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932 (Tas), s 12(3)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Probate proceedings
4. › Costs of executor or administrator
5. › Whether executor or administrator acted properly
6. › Whether costs incurred in furtherance of personal interest
7. › Supreme Court Rules 2000 (Tas), rr 57, 64, 739

Quick Take

An administrator who defends a revocation action without a reasonably arguable case and in pursuit of personal benefit will be ordered to pay the successful party's costs on a party-and-party basis. However, indemnity costs will not be awarded absent evidence of ulterior motive or wilful disregard of known facts or clearly established law, particularly where the successful party also contributed to the circumstances giving rise to the litigation.