Davey v Silverstein

Davey brought an application against Silverstein, a legal practitioner, and others, in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The application sought to restrain Silverstein from acting for co-defendants in the proceeding on the basis of a potential conflict of interest. Additionally, the application sought to compel a corporate defendant to answer interrogatories, as the sole director and shareholder of the corporate defendant had invoked privilege against self-incrimination.

The court considered the inherent jurisdiction to protect its processes and the potential for a conflict of interest. The court also examined the application to compel answers to interrogatories and the invocation of privilege against self-incrimination. The court found that there was no real risk to the proper administration of justice, and therefore the application to restrain Silverstein was refused. Regarding the interrogatories, the court determined that, given the sole director and shareholder had invoked privilege against self-incrimination, the application to compel answers was refused.

The court's decision was based on the application of Miller v Martin [2019] VSCA 86, which established the court's inherent jurisdiction to protect its processes, and Re Australian Property Custodian Holdings Ltd (in liq) (No 2) (2012) 93 ACSR 130, which considered the invocation of privilege against self-incrimination. The discretionary considerations also played a role in the court's decision to refuse the applications.

The final orders of the court were that the application to restrain Silverstein from acting for co-defendants was refused, and the application to compel the corporate defendant to answer interrogatories was also refused.