Colton v Hunter

In Colton v Hunter, the Court of Appeal examined an appeal against a decision made by a Master concerning the appointment of an inspector to investigate a trust under the Trustees Act 1936 (SA). The Master had made an order appointing an inspector, but the circumstances of the parties had changed following the order, leading to an appeal. Both parties then sought to set aside the Master’s order by consent, raising questions about the procedural rules and principles governing such actions.

The court considered whether the proceedings to appoint an inspector were inter partes in nature and whether the Master’s order could be set aside under Rule 242 of the Supreme Court Rules (2006). This rule allows the Court to set aside a judgment and reopen an action if it is satisfied that the justice of the case so requires. The court also needed to determine whether evidence of changed circumstances was necessary for the parties to successfully set aside the order by consent.

The court noted that the parties had sought to set aside the order without presenting evidence of changed circumstances, which the judge had previously expressed concern about. However, the judge agreed to adjourn the matter to allow the parties to file affidavits explaining the changed circumstances. The affidavits provided by the plaintiffs stated that they were now satisfied with the financial position of the trust due to newly discovered documents, leading to their consent to set aside the Master’s order. The court accepted the affidavits and set aside the order, allowing the parties to proceed as they had agreed.

The final orders of the court were to set aside the order of the Master appointing an inspector and to permit the parties to proceed in accordance with their consent. This outcome allowed the parties to resolve the dispute based on their changed understanding of the trust's financial position.