Shama Amnir & Ors. v Fahid Bala & Ors.
[2023] EWHC 1054 (Ch)
Joanna Claire Daley v Susan Amanda Hodges
20 October 2023
[2023] EWHC 3397 (Ch)
High Court
Two sisters fought over their late mother's money. The court decided that one sister made the situation much more difficult, so she had to pay a bigger share of the legal bills from her inheritance.
Key Facts
- •Dispute over costs arising from substituted personal representatives' application for directions in the estate of Jill, deceased.
- •Claimant and defendant are Jill's daughters.
- •Substituted personal representatives' costs were summarily assessed at £55,286.60.
- •Disputes between the claimant and defendant involved a loan/gift of £35,000, chattels, and allegations of undue influence.
- •The claimant alleged the defendant intermeddled in the estate.
- •The court previously ordered the defendant to pay the claimant's costs (£31,772).
- •The current issue is whether to apportion the substituted personal representatives' costs between the claimant and defendant.
- •The defendant argued the claimant's conduct increased costs.
- •The claimant argued the substituted personal representatives should bear the costs.
- •The defendant assigned her interest in the estate to a third party.
Legal Principles
Court has discretion over costs.
CPR Part 44
General rule: Unsuccessful party pays costs, but exceptions apply.
CPR 44.2(3)
Court considers conduct of parties, success on part of case, and settlement offers when deciding on costs.
CPR 44.2(4)
Conduct includes pre-action and during proceedings, reasonableness of raising/pursuing issues, and manner of pursuing/defending case.
CPR 44.2(5)
Court can order a party to pay a proportion of another party's costs.
CPR 44.2(6)(a)
Costs of trustees/personal representatives are usually reimbursed from the estate.
Pegler v McDonald [2022] EWHC 2069 (Ch)
Classification of costs (e.g., hostile costs between beneficiaries).
Re Buckton [1907] 2 Ch 406
Outcomes
Claimant ordered to pay 65% (£35,936) of the substituted personal representatives' costs from her share of the estate; defendant to pay 35% (£19,350) from her share.
The claimant's conduct contributed significantly to the increased costs and complexity of the substituted personal representatives' application. While the representatives had no option but to seek court directions, the claimant's actions exacerbated the situation.