Gordana Smith v Colin Steingold

Gordana Smith, the Plaintiff, sought relief against Colin Steingold, the First Defendant, and his associated entities, the Second and Third Defendants, in the Federal Court of Australia. The Plaintiff alleged that the First Defendant had exerted undue influence and engaged in oppressive conduct against her. The Plaintiff also sought to restrain the First Defendant's solicitor, the Respondent, from continuing to act on behalf of the First and Second Defendants, on the basis that he was in possession of confidential information and had knowledge of the Plaintiff's character and tendencies.

The central issue before the court was whether the solicitor should be restrained from acting for the First and Second Defendants in light of the allegations of undue influence and oppressive conduct. The court was required to consider whether the solicitor was in possession of confidential information, whether he had knowledge of the Plaintiff's character and tendencies, and whether a fair-minded reasonably informed member of the public would regard proper administration of justice as requiring the solicitor to be restrained from acting.

The court found that the solicitor was in possession of confidential information relating to the Plaintiff's personal affairs and was aware of her character and tendencies. The court concluded that a fair-minded reasonably informed member of the public would regard proper administration of justice as requiring the solicitor to be restrained from acting for the First and Second Defendants. The court held that the solicitor was restrained from continuing to act for the First and Second Defendants in the proceedings.

The court did not make any further orders beyond the restraint of the solicitor from acting for the First and Second Defendants.