Drivas v Jakopovic (No. 2)

The case of Drivas v Jakopovic (No. 2) involved the dispute between the plaintiff, Drivas, and the defendant, Jakopovic, concerning the estate of a deceased individual. The proceedings were related to the probate of the deceased's will and the subsequent distribution of the estate. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the deceased was the cause of the litigation, and if so, whether it was reasonable for the plaintiff to have pursued the proceedings. This issue was pivotal in determining whether the general rule that costs follow the event could be departed from.

The court meticulously examined the circumstances surrounding the litigation. It considered whether the deceased's actions or inactions directly led to the necessity of the legal proceedings. The court also assessed the reasonableness of the plaintiff's decision to pursue the litigation, taking into account the complexity of the estate and the nature of the disputes. The court found that the deceased was indeed the cause of the litigation but also concluded that the plaintiff's prosecution of the proceedings was reasonable given the circumstances. This conclusion was based on the significant challenges presented by the estate and the necessity to resolve the disputes through the court.

Given the findings, the court determined that it would not make an order as to costs, deviating from the general rule. The court's decision highlighted the exceptional nature of the case, where the deceased's actions necessitated the litigation, and the plaintiff's actions were deemed reasonable under the circumstances. This decision underscores the importance of context in applying the general rule of costs following the event. The court's reasoning was based on the specific facts and the reasonableness of the plaintiff's actions in the context of the estate's complexities.