RAJPAUL ESTATE (RE)

This case arose from a dispute over the validity of a will in the Estate of Margaret Rajpaul. The Respondent challenged the will and raised concerns about the deceased’s capacity at the time it was executed. The Estate applied for security for costs, and a preliminary issue arose as to whether the Respondent should be allowed to question the drafting lawyer before that Application is heard.

The Respondent argued that questioning the drafting lawyer was necessary to assess suspicious circumstances surrounding the will, including concerns from medical records and the lawyer’s file about the deceased’s cognitive state. The Estate accepted the evidence was relevant to the will challenge but argued that it was not necessary at this stage. It emphasized that a security for costs application only requires a limited review of the merits and should not involve detailed examination of disputed facts or credibility. 

Justice Malik agreed with the Estate and refused to allow questioning at this stage. It held that permitting a third‑party examination would improperly expand a preliminary costs inquiry into a full merits review. The Court confirmed that security for costs applications are meant to involve only a limited assessment and that the parties already had sufficient evidence to proceed. The Application to question the drafting lawyer was therefore dismissed.