Afkos Industries Pty Ltd v Pullinger Stewart

In the matter of Afkos Industries Pty Ltd versus Pullinger Stewart, the plaintiff, a company, brought an action against the defendant, a firm of solicitors, for alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and negligence in their conduct of an arbitration. The plaintiff sought damages and an order for the return of legal costs. The defendant, in turn, applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the plaintiff from retaining their current solicitors, citing a conflict of interest. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the defendant had grounds to seek an interlocutory injunction, considering the alleged conflict of interest between the plaintiff and their current solicitors. The court also needed to determine the nature of the costs awarded under section 34(1) of the Commercial Arbitration Act 1985 (WA) and whether the wishes of the client were relevant in resolving the conflict. Additionally, the court considered the independence of the lawyer and the client's right to choose their legal representation.

The court dismissed the application for an interlocutory injunction, finding that the client's wishes to retain their current solicitors outweighed the potential conflict of interest. The court reasoned that the costs awarded in the arbitration were not subject to the control of the court and thus did not warrant the injunction. The independence of the lawyers and the client's autonomy in selecting legal counsel were deemed significant factors. The court concluded that the application for an injunction did not meet the necessary threshold, given the circumstances.

No further orders were made beyond dismissing the appeal.