Vaughan v Hoskovich (No. 2)

The case of Vaughan v Hoskovich (No. 2) involved a dispute regarding the setting aside of costs orders in probate proceedings. The plaintiff, Vaughan, sought to set aside costs orders in relation to offers of compromise made by the defendant, Hoskovich. The proceedings arose from the refusal of Hoskovich to accept offers of compromise made by Vaughan. The primary focus of the court was to determine whether indemnity costs should be awarded from the date of the offers and whether the offers of compromise were valid under the relevant rules.

The legal issues central to the case were whether the offers of compromise made by Vaughan were governed by Part 20, Division 4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules and whether indemnity costs should be awarded from the date of the offers. The court examined the nature of the offers and whether they were exclusive of costs, as required by the rules. Additionally, the court considered whether Hoskovich acted unreasonably in rejecting the offers and whether the deceased, by not making a will, effectively caused the litigation.

The court concluded that the offers of compromise were not made under Part 20, Division 4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules because they were not exclusive of costs. The court found that the questions raised by the proceedings were finely balanced, and the deceased's failure to make a will effectively caused the litigation. Given these circumstances, the court held that Hoskovich did not act unreasonably in rejecting the Calderbank offers. Consequently, the costs orders were not set aside. The court found that there were no grounds to award indemnity costs from the date of the offers.