Lex Nominees Pty Ltd (in liq) v. Triscott

In the matter of Lex Nominees Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Triscott, the plaintiff, a company in liquidation, sought to join two additional plaintiffs in three proceedings against Paul Anthony Triscott and St Paul Travellers Insurance Company Limited. The liquidators of the plaintiff sought to be joined as plaintiffs in proceedings against Triscott, who was a former solicitor and director of the plaintiff, and against the professional indemnity insurer of Triscott. The liquidators argued that they were the appropriate plaintiffs in the proceedings due to their role in the company's liquidation. The court considered the appropriate timing for the limitation period for the new plaintiffs, as well as the utility of joining the liquidators as plaintiffs. Atkinson J held that it was desirable, just, and convenient for the liquidators to be joined as plaintiffs, and that the limitation period for the new plaintiffs should start when the original proceedings began in September 2006.

The court considered whether it was appropriate to join the liquidators as plaintiffs, and if so, what the effect on the limitation period would be. Atkinson J noted that the court has discretion to order otherwise than the usual rule, but found that there was no sufficient reason to do so in this case. The court also considered the lack of adequate explanation for failing to commence the proceedings in the name of the proposed second plaintiffs, but found that the liquidators had taken action promptly to join the proceedings out of an abundance of caution. Atkinson J held that it was desirable, just, and convenient for the liquidators to be joined as plaintiffs, and that the limitation period for the new plaintiffs should start when the original proceedings began in September 2006.

The court held that it was appropriate to join the liquidators as plaintiffs in the proceedings, and that the limitation period for the new plaintiffs should start when the original proceedings began in September 2006. Atkinson J made orders as per the drafts handed up, as amended and initialled by the court. The court also made a costs order in each matter, fixing the costs at $1600.