
    Elizabeth B. Jenkinson, Plaintiff, v. Amelia Harris and Arthur Hammond, as Executors, etc., of Edwin Harris, Deceased, Defendants.
    (Supreme Court, Ontario Special Term,
    June, 1899.)
    Reference of disputed claim against a decedent — Neither the report of the referee nor his allowance of costs against executors are reviewable at Special Term.
    Since the amendment made in 1893 to séetion 2718 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the section which provides for the reference of a disputed claim against the estate of a decedent, the report of a referee allowing among other things, costs against executors, upon the ground that they have unreasonably resisted payment of the claim, is not reviewable at Special Term, and it has now no power to confirm either the decision as to costs or the report in general.
    
      Motion to confirm the report of a referee upon a claim against executors and for an order that costs be allowed against the defendants’ executors.
    George L. Bachman, for motion.
    Arthur J. Hammond, opposed.
   Dunwelly, J.

Motion at Special Term to confirm report of a referee upon a claim against executors referred under the provisions of section 2718 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and for an order of this court that costs be^allowed against the defendants executors.

The referee’s report allows costs against the executors»upon the ground that the claim was unreasonably resisted.

Since the amendment of 1893 to section 2718, the referee possesses the right to adjudicate upon the question of costs; the reference is given the same standing and authority as a reference in an action and judgment is to be entered upon the report.

.An application to confirm is made unnecessary and the former practice of applying to the court for confirmation is no longer applicable to these references which have been rendered by the amendment the same in effect as the ordinary references in actions upon which judgments are rendered without application to the court, because the referee is empowered to determine the issues and decide the claim in place of the court.

The court cannot review the decision of the referee, consequently the court cannot confirm it.

As to costs, the referee is also authorized by the amendment to decide; and where he does so, his decision cannot be reviewed at Special Term.

It is only in a case where costs are not passed upon by the referee that an application to the court is still proper. Fisher v. Bennett, 21 Misc. Rep. 178.

It follows that the motion must be denied, but without costs.

Motion denied, without costs.  