SIGN UP

"joined As A Party" (Removal Of Executor, Cpr 57.13)

Avatar Image
wessexmario | 17:37 Wed 28th Oct 2015 | Civil
8 Answers
in CPR 57.13(3) it says "Every personal representative of the estate shall be joined as a party."

What exactly does "joined as a party" mean?

Answers

1 to 8 of 8rss feed

Avatar Image
Nooooooo. Each PR MUST be joined. If C is claiming to remove one PR the other(s) must be joined as a Defendant. So you would claim against PR1 and PR2 and name them as D's and serve the proceedings on them. PR2 may choose to take no active part. That is a matter for him.
14:44 Fri 30th Oct 2015
A 'joined party' is simply a person who is included in legal proceedings.

With some legal proceedings a person has to apply to the Court if the wish to become a 'joined party'. (e.g. a grandparent would not automatically be a 'joined party' in proceedings relating to the care of a child but could apply to become so).

However, in the case of actions dealt with under CPR 57.13(3), all personal representative of the estate are thus automatically considered to be joined parties.
Question Author
thanks for that, but does "joined as a party" mean they have to be on the same side, ie: both claimants or both defendants?

Does "joined" mean joined to the case, or that the parties are joined to each other?
Question Author
to clarify, if a beneficiary is requesting the replacement of one executor and wants no impact on the second executor, and the second executor does not want to be a claimant or defendant, does the second executor have to be a claimant or defendant because of this rule??
They are each simply 'joined' as a party to the proceedings, not to each other.
Question Author
it's starting to make sense now...
so could a "joined personal representative" under that Rule just be a witness, rather than be a claimant or defendant?
A joined personal representative is simply a personal representative who (because he is 'joined' to the proceedings) has a right to be heard by the Court.
Question Author
brilliant, I think a defendant executor is trying to convince me into thinking that I have to make the other executor a claimant, his motive being to divert attention away from my claim for removal, and allow him to attack the other executor.
Nooooooo. Each PR MUST be joined. If C is claiming to remove one PR the other(s) must be joined as a Defendant. So you would claim against PR1 and PR2 and name them as D's and serve the proceedings on them. PR2 may choose to take no active part. That is a matter for him.

1 to 8 of 8rss feed

Do you know the answer?

"joined As A Party" (Removal Of Executor, Cpr 57.13)

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.