Mason v Triezenberg

In Mason v Triezenberg, Alexander Mason appealed against his removal as a trustee of the Mamari Trust and the Mamari (No 2) Trust. Vicki Triezenberg and Paul Morley Dodd as trustees of the Mamari Trust and the Mamari (No 2) Trust were the respondents. The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr Mason's appeal and found that he was not entitled to an indemnity for his costs. The Court found that the Judge's decision to remove Mr Mason as a trustee was justified due to his hostility towards his co-trustees and beneficiaries, and his inability to fairly consider the beneficiaries' interests. The Court also found that the Judge's decision not to remove Ms Triezenberg and Mr Dodd as trustees was not wrong, as they had been handpicked by Mr and Mrs Mason to be trustees and had worked conscientiously to carry out their roles. The Court agreed with the High Court that both the respondents and Mr Mason were each entitled to an indemnity for their reasonable costs in the High Court from Mamari 2. The same reasoning applied to the costs on these appeals, and there was no need to make an order for party/party costs on these appeals.