This appears to be a more recent, shorter case where the assets of a trust have been suggested to be the security for the costs.

I can't tell what the outcome was.  It appears that the court couldn't determine "whether the plaintiff owns them in its own right or whether it owns them as trustee" after a search of Landgate.  I wonder why they couldn't tell the difference?

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/wa/WASC/2009/282.html

Can anyone interpret this for me?  It seems very relevant to this discussion.  If someone could briefly explain whether the assets were decided to be used as security by the court because of the plaintiff being a trustee of the trust.

Kind regards,
Peter.

Thankyou Terry, I appreciate your knowledge and answers.

This sounds like a legal quagmire.

Can anyone point me to any precedents in Australian court where something like litigation against a trustee over property held in the trust has occurred?  I would like to go through a real world scenario to make better sense of it.

Peter.