Re S

In the matter of Re S, the case involved the plaintiff, who was under legal incapacity, and the defendants. The dispute centred on the procedures followed during the proceedings, particularly the absence of a tutor for the plaintiff and the recoverability of costs incurred by the plaintiff's solicitor. The case was heard in the court. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the absence of a tutor for the plaintiff during the proceedings constituted an irregularity that would prevent the plaintiff's solicitor from recovering the costs incurred. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate process for enforcing the consent orders made during the proceedings.

The court found that the absence of a tutor during the proceedings did not constitute an irregularity that would preclude the plaintiff's solicitor from recovering the costs incurred, as the defendants had waived any such irregularity. The court also determined that the recoverability of costs was not dependent on whether a tutor was subsequently appointed for the plaintiff. Regarding the enforcement of the consent orders, the court held that the orders were not expressed as orders of the court but rather as an agreement between the parties. Consequently, the enforcement of these orders would require a claim for specific performance, and the appointment of a tutor was neither necessary nor appropriate for this purpose. As a result, the notice of motion was dismissed with no order as to costs.