The Court held that where a family provision plaintiff succeeds but only obtains a fraction of the relief sought (here 7.5%), and the successful aspects were largely uncontested, the court may decline to award costs to either party despite the plaintiff's nominal success. The case also confirms that an unsuccessful plaintiff's financial position will not shield them from an adverse costs order where their circumstances are not truly fragile, even where the claim failed on the basis of adequate existing provision.
The full text is available to signed-in members.