Bremner v French

The matter of Bremner v French involved the applicants, Bremner, and the respondents, French, and concerned the sale of co-owned property. The applicants sought to vary and set aside certain orders made in 2019 concerning the appointment of a trustee to sell the property. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicants argued for variations to the orders concerning the sale, including an extension of the date for sale and the recovery of costs. The respondents opposed the variations, arguing that the applicants' delay in seeking an extension of the sale date and their failure to bring the application earlier had prejudiced the sale.

The court was required to decide whether the applicants could vary the orders concerning the sale of the property and whether the sale trustee could recover costs. The court considered the principles set out in Woods v Sherriff of Queensland and held that the applicants could vary the orders concerning the sale of the property. The court found that the delay in seeking an extension of the sale date and the failure to bring the application earlier did not necessarily preclude the applicants from seeking variations to the orders. The court held that the sale trustee could recover costs, but that these costs were limited to those that would have been incurred in bringing the application at the relevant time.

The court held that the applicants could vary the orders concerning the sale of the property. The court found that the principles set out in Woods v Sherriff of Queensland applied, and that the applicants' delay in seeking an extension of the sale date and their failure to bring the application earlier did not necessarily preclude them from seeking variations to the orders. The court held that the sale trustee could recover costs, but that these costs were limited to those that would have been incurred in bringing the application at the relevant time. The court found that the applicants had acted reasonably in seeking an extension of the sale date and that the delay in bringing the application had not prejudiced the respondents. The court varied the orders concerning the sale of the property and ordered that the sale trustee's costs be limited to those that would have been incurred in bringing the application at the relevant time.