Campbell, Campbell & Cannon as Executors of the Will of the Estate of the late Donald Campbell, deceased v Campbell
Case
•
[2012] QSC 302
•2 October 2012
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Campbell, Campbell & Cannon as Executors of the Will of the Estate of the late Donald Campbell, deceased v Campbell [2012] QSC 302
[2012] QSC 302
2 October 2012
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case before the court involved Campbell, Campbell & Cannon, the executors of the will of the late Donald Campbell, as applicants, and Campbell as the respondent. The dispute centred on the costs associated with a caveat lodged by the respondent's solicitor, Ms Sewell, on behalf of the respondent. The applicants sought an order for Ms Sewell to pay their costs on an indemnity basis, alleging that she acted unreasonably and irresponsibly in lodging the caveat.
The court needed to decide whether Ms Sewell should personally pay the applicants' costs due to her alleged unreasonable and irresponsible conduct in relation to the caveat. The applicants argued that Ms Sewell had made scandalous allegations in her affidavit that were not supported by evidence, casting blame on others instead of taking responsibility for her actions.
The court found that Ms Sewell had not been rigorously accurate in her affidavit and had made scandalous allegations not supported by the evidence. The court concluded that Ms Sewell's actions warranted her personally paying the applicants' costs. The court ordered that the respondent would pay the applicants' costs up to 20 December 2011 on the standard basis and from 20 December 2011 to 21 February 2012 on an indemnity basis. Additionally, Ms Sewell was ordered to pay the applicants' costs from 21 February 2012 on an indemnity basis.
The court needed to decide whether Ms Sewell should personally pay the applicants' costs due to her alleged unreasonable and irresponsible conduct in relation to the caveat. The applicants argued that Ms Sewell had made scandalous allegations in her affidavit that were not supported by evidence, casting blame on others instead of taking responsibility for her actions.
The court found that Ms Sewell had not been rigorously accurate in her affidavit and had made scandalous allegations not supported by the evidence. The court concluded that Ms Sewell's actions warranted her personally paying the applicants' costs. The court ordered that the respondent would pay the applicants' costs up to 20 December 2011 on the standard basis and from 20 December 2011 to 21 February 2012 on an indemnity basis. Additionally, Ms Sewell was ordered to pay the applicants' costs from 21 February 2012 on an indemnity basis.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Limitation Periods
-
Admissibility of Evidence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Albury v Sammut (No 2) [2019] QSC 182
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Albury v Sammut (No 2)
[2019] QSC 182
In The Will of (No 2)
[2012] QSC 369
Albury v Sammut (No 2)
[2019] QSC 182
Cases Cited
20
Statutory Material Cited
1
Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Levick
[1999] FCA 1580
Levick v Commissioner of Taxation
[2000] FCA 674
Gitsham v Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd
[2002] QCA 416