Welcome to today’s Chamberlains Selection, where we will discuss with James d’Apice on the matter of Hundy v Turner [2019] NSWSC 1881. We will talk about the appointment of trustees for the sale of a co-owned bankrupt estate.

The plaintiff was trustee of a bankrupt estate that included a co-ownership interest in some land: [6] After some back and forth about selling it, the plaintiff commenced s66G proceedings and got the Court to appoint trustees for sale: [14] The orders made included an order that the other co-owner pay the legal costs of the plaintiff. The property was sold, yielding a modest sum: [15] The plaintiff’s lawyer itemised the legal costs incurred in the s66G proceedings, discounted them, and sought the other co-owner’s approval that they be paid from the trust funds: [16] The other co-owner’s solicitor was, to put it politely, effectively unresponsive over a period: [17] – [25] Rather than getting the legal costs assessed, the plaintiff sought a fixed sum costs order. The Court agreed a fixed sum costs order was appropriate, due largely to the conduct of the defendant who failed to engage with the “relatively simple” matter of costs: [41] The eventual costs order was more or less the sum sought: [43], [44]