NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Vaughan v Hoskovich [2010] NSWSC 1459
HEARING DATE(S) : 21 July 2010
JUDGMENT DATE : 21 July 2010
JURISDICTION : Equity
JUDGMENT OF : White J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 21 July 2010
DECISION : 1. Plaintiff's application to set aside the orders of 30/6/10 refused. 2. Costs of today are costs in the proceedings and abide the costs orders made on 30/6/10.
CATCHWORDS : COSTS – application to set aside costs orders in probate proceedings – where defendant rejected offers of compromise made by plaintiff – whether to award indemnity costs from date of offers – offer of compromise not made under Part 20, Division 4 of Uniform Civil Procedure Rules because not exclusive of costs – where questions raised by proceedings finely balanced and deceased effectively caused litigation by not making will – defendant did not act unreasonably in not accepting Calderbank offers – costs orders not set aside
CATEGORY : Consequential orders
Saul v Lin [2007] NSWSC 782 Short v Crawley (No. 42) [2009] NSWSC 1110 Short v Crawley (No. 43) [2009] NSWSC 1274 CASES CITED : Calderbank v Calderbank [1976] Fam 93 Trustee for the Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust t/as Salvation Army v Becker (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 194 Trustee for the Salvation Army (NSW) Property Trust t/as Salvation Army v Becker (No 2) Vaughan v Hoskovich [2010] NSWSC 706 Becker v Public Trustee of New South Wales [2006] NSWSC 1146
PARTIES : Plaintiff: Janet Louise Vaughan Defendant: Pauline Hoskovich
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate