Brown v King

The appeal in *Brown v King* concerned allegations of procedural unfairness and various challenges to findings of fact made by the primary judge. The appellants, who were unrepresented at trial, contended that they were denied a proper opportunity to present their case. A further issue arose from the fact that a receiver had not been joined as a party to the proceedings, leading to arguments that the primary judge erred in not making specific findings concerning the receiver's conduct.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had failed to afford procedural fairness to the unrepresented appellants, and whether the absence of the receiver as a party necessitated particular findings or vitiated the existing ones. The court also considered a range of other challenges to the primary judge's factual findings.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the primary judge's conduct. The court determined that the appellants had been afforded procedural fairness and that the primary judge was not obliged to make specific findings regarding the receiver in the absence of the receiver being joined as a party. The court also found no basis to interfere with the primary judge's findings of fact. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellants were ordered to pay 80% of the first respondent's costs.