Crimmins & Montagu (No 2)

Crimmins & Montagu (No 2) concerned a dispute between the parties, Crimmins and Montagu, heard before Le Poer Trench J. The precise nature of the dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but it involved a second iteration of proceedings, indicated by "(No 2)".

The central legal issue before the court was the determination of costs. Specifically, the court was required to decide how the costs of the proceedings should be allocated between the parties, likely in light of the outcome of the substantive dispute.

Le Poer Trench J applied the general principle that costs follow the event, meaning the unsuccessful party typically bears the costs of the successful party. However, the court also considered whether there were any special circumstances that warranted a departure from this usual rule. The judgment would have involved an assessment of the conduct of the parties during the litigation and the merits of their respective arguments to arrive at a just and equitable costs order.