WILLIAMSON & ANOR -v- NILANT [2003] WASC 21

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2003] WASC 21
Case No:	COR:313/2000	Heard:	15 JANUARY 2003
Coram:	ROBERTS-SMITH J	Delivered:	15/01/03
No of pages:	7	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Application refused
Category:	A
PDF Version

Parties:	IAN EDWARD WILLIAMSON YOGAN SOOBIAH NAIDOO CHARLES PHILIPPE LOUIS NILANT
Catchwords:	Courts practice and procedure Joinder of parties Conflict of interest Order restraining solicitors from acting Solicitors wishing to appeal Order that solicitors be joined as second defendant Application to set aside order for joinder
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Birtles v Commonwealth of Australia [1960] VR 247 Cook & Ors v Northoak Holdings Pty Ltd & Anor (1997) 25 ACSR 517 Gracechurch Holdings Pty Ltd v Breeze & Anor (1992) 7 WAR 518 National Australia Bank Ltd v Wily [2002] NSWSC 573 The Millwall [1905] P 155 Williamson & Anor v Nilant [2002] WASC 225 Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

CITATION : WILLIAMSON & ANOR -v- NILANT [2003] WASC 21 CORAM : ROBERTS-SMITH J HEARD : 15 JANUARY 2003 DELIVERED : 15 JANUARY 2003 FILE NO/S : COR 313 of 2000 MATTER : LPO TRANSACT PTY LTD (ACN 072 999 716) (IN LIQ) BETWEEN : IAN EDWARD WILLIAMSON

First Applicant

YOGAN SOOBIAH NAIDOO

Second Applicant

AND

CHARLES PHILIPPE LOUIS NILANT

Respondent

Catchwords:

Courts practice and procedure - Joinder of parties - Conflict of interest - Order restraining solicitors from acting - Solicitors wishing to appeal - Order that solicitors be joined as second defendant - Application to set aside order for joinder

Legislation:

Nil

(Page 2)

Result:

Application refused

Category: A

Representation:

Counsel:

First Applicant : Mr K C Staffa

Second Applicant : Mr K C Staffa

Respondent : Mr A Metaxas

Solicitors:

First Applicant : Kevin Staffa

Second Applicant : Kevin Staffa

Respondent : Metaxas & Vernon

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Birtles v Commonwealth of Australia [1960] VR 247
Cook & Ors v Northoak Holdings Pty Ltd & Anor (1997) 25 ACSR 517
Gracechurch Holdings Pty Ltd v Breeze & Anor (1992) 7 WAR 518
National Australia Bank Ltd v Wily [2002] NSWSC 573
The Millwall [1905] P 155
Williamson & Anor v Nilant [2002] WASC 225

Case(s) also cited:

Nil

(Page 3)

1 ROBERTS-SMITH J: This is an application by Mr Staffa on behalf of the first and second plaintiffs to have set aside an order made by Heenan J on 8 October 2002 that Charles Philippe Louis Nilant be designated as the first defendant in this action and that the solicitors Metaxas & Vernon be joined as second defendants.

2 His Honour made a further order that other parties have liberty to apply to revoke or vary the order within 21 days of it being served upon them. The present application is being made pursuant to that liberty to apply.

3 It is not necessary to set out in any detail at all the substance of the substantive action, suffice to say…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Williamson v Nilant

Details

AGLC: Williamson v Nilant [2003] WASC 21
Case: [2003] WASC 21
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Williamson and Anor v Nilant involved a dispute in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The first and second applicants, Ian Edward Williamson and Yogan Soobiah Naidoo, sought to set aside an order made by Heenan J on 8 October 2002, which designated Charles Philippe Louis Nilant as the first defendant and the solicitors Metaxas & Vernon as the second defendants in this action. The applicants argued that the order was made without proper justification and sought its revocation.

The legal issues before the court included whether the order made by Heenan J was proper and if the solicitors had a relevant interest which would justify their joinder as a defendant in the proceedings. The court considered whether the order was appropriate in light of the inherent jurisdiction of the court to control its processes and those of its officers, including liquidators. Additionally, the court examined whether the solicitors had a sufficient interest to be joined as defendants and if they were entitled to appeal the decision of McKechnie J.

Roberts-Smith J found that the order made by Heenan J was proper and that the solicitors had a relevant interest in the proceedings. The court held that the order was justified given the inherent jurisdiction of the court to control its processes and those of its officers. The court further determined that the solicitors had a sufficient interest to be joined as defendants in the proceedings, as the order made by McKechnie J was directed specifically to the solicitors. The court found that it was proper and appropriate for the solicitors to remain as second defendants in the proceedings, thereby entitling them to a right of appeal against the judgment of McKechnie J.

The final orders of the court were that the application to set aside the order for joinder be refused, and that the order made by Heenan J that Metaxas & Vernon be joined as second defendants in the proceedings be maintained. The solicitors were thus entitled to appeal the judgment of McKechnie J.

Orders