Amos v Fraser [1906] HCA 57

78 HIGH COURT (1906.

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

AMOS 0 Sela cb, gselbie Ying He . . APPELLANT; PLAINTIFF, 7

AND FRASER AND ANOTHER .. a ' . RESPONDENTS.

DEFENDANTS,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA.

H.C. or A. Practice~Appeal to High Court—Judgment involving claim, demand or question 1906. to or respecting property amounting to £300—Judiciary Act 1903 (No. 6 of -—~ 1903), see. 35 (1) (a), (2)—Judgment ordering trustee to pay costs—Right of MELBOURNE, trustee to appeal.

Cegetlaees! An action was brought by a remainderman asking for a declaration that

the trustees were liable to keep and maintain the property and the buildings

Gritith 0.., and fences thereon in repair during the life of the tenant for life, 'The O'Connor I. property was valued at about £2,000, and the buildings and fences thereon at over £300,

Held, that a judgment of the Supreme Court of a State refusing any relief was a judgment which involved a claim, demand, or question to or respecting — property amounting to or of the value of £300 within the meaning of the Judiciary Act 1903, sec. 35 (1) (a), (2), and therefore that an appeal to the High Court lay without leave.

Per O'Connor J.—The measure of the appealable amount is the value of the | appellant's interest in the property or civil right.

An order refusing a trustee his costs is subject to appeal, as is also the

question as to whether the trustee has been guilty of such misconduct as to disentitle him to costs.

Judgment of Supreme Court varied.

AppeaL from the Supreme Court of Victoria. An action was brought in the Supreme Court of Victoria by Annie Amos against Alexander Fraser and Margaret Riley in

4C.L.R.] OF AUSTRALIA.

which the claim indorsed on the writ, dated February 18th H.C. or A.

1905, was as follows:—"The plaintiff's claim is as devisee of a freehold farm and its appurtenances at Millbrook in the State of Victoria under the will dated 3rd October 1898 of her father Joseph Riley who died in or about October 1898 subject to the life estate therein of the widow of the said testator of which will the defendants are the executors and trustees and have obtained probate thereof from the Supreme Court of Victoria and have assumed the administration of the testator's estate including the said farm and its appurtenances. And the plaintiff claims that the defendants as such executors and trustees have allowed the said farm and its buildings and fences to get out of good order and condition and into disrepair in breach of the trusts of the said will.