Tory v Megna

In *Tory v Megna*, the applicant, Mr Tory, sought leave from the Court of Appeal to withdraw a submitting appearance he had previously filed. Mr Tory had initially filed this appearance when the appellant, who shared the same interests, was represented by solicitors. However, his solicitors subsequently ceased to act for him, prompting the application to withdraw the submitting appearance and file a contested appearance instead.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to grant Mr Tory leave to withdraw his submitting appearance. The court considered that granting such leave is a discretionary decision. Generally, leave is granted if an appearance was entered by mistake or accident, but not if it was a deliberate choice. Other relevant considerations included whether the applicant possessed an arguable case, whether there would be real prejudice to the other party, and whether there had been any material change in the case.

Applying these principles, the Court of Appeal determined that it was appropriate to grant leave. Although no exact precedent was precisely on point, the court found that, in accordance with established legal principles, the circumstances warranted allowing the withdrawal of the submitting appearance.

The Court of Appeal ordered that Mr Tory's submitting appearance filed on 8 July 2011 could be withdrawn, and a contested appearance filed in its place. This order was made subject to certain conditions, including the provision of security in the amount of $62,000 within 21 days. Liberty to apply was granted to the Registrar regarding the consequences of failing to provide the security and for fixing a date for the hearing of the appeal.