Gower v FTG Securities Ltd
Case
•
[2020] NZHC 1105
•25 May 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Gower v FTG Securities Ltd [2020] NZHC 1105
[2020] NZHC 1105
25 May 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Gower v FTG Securities Ltd involved Robert Bruce Walker, the liquidator of Tuam Ventures Limited, seeking an order to restrain solicitors Grant Smith, Clive Cousins, and their legal entity, NZ Legal Ltd, from acting in the proceeding. The application was brought against FTG Securities Ltd, represented by Grant Smith, who had been the solicitor for FTG throughout the proceeding. The matter was one of four related proceedings which had been consolidated. The proceedings required expeditious resolution due to the significant contested funds involved.
The substantive issue before the Court was whether the application to disqualify the solicitors was an abuse of process. The Court found that the application was an abuse of process due to the significant delay in bringing the application, which was brought just two weeks before a four-day hearing. The Court found that the application was made in bad faith and without adequate justification, and that it would prejudice FTG's right to choose its own representation. The Court also noted that the application was inappropriate as it sought to restrain the solicitors from acting in any other proceeding relating to the liquidation of Tuam Ventures, rather than just the proceeding in which the application was brought.
The Court dismissed the application and ordered Walker to pay the costs of the first respondent in opposing the application. The Court reserved the quantum of costs and disbursements, with the first respondent to file a memorandum in relation to quantum within 20 working days, and Walker to file a memorandum in reply within five working days thereafter. The Court also noted that it was tentatively of the view that the first respondent was entitled to increased costs under r 14.6(3)(b)(ii) on the basis that the application lacked merit. The Court reserved costs as between Walker and the other parties involved in the proceeding.
The substantive issue before the Court was whether the application to disqualify the solicitors was an abuse of process. The Court found that the application was an abuse of process due to the significant delay in bringing the application, which was brought just two weeks before a four-day hearing. The Court found that the application was made in bad faith and without adequate justification, and that it would prejudice FTG's right to choose its own representation. The Court also noted that the application was inappropriate as it sought to restrain the solicitors from acting in any other proceeding relating to the liquidation of Tuam Ventures, rather than just the proceeding in which the application was brought.
The Court dismissed the application and ordered Walker to pay the costs of the first respondent in opposing the application. The Court reserved the quantum of costs and disbursements, with the first respondent to file a memorandum in relation to quantum within 20 working days, and Walker to file a memorandum in reply within five working days thereafter. The Court also noted that it was tentatively of the view that the first respondent was entitled to increased costs under r 14.6(3)(b)(ii) on the basis that the application lacked merit. The Court reserved costs as between Walker and the other parties involved in the proceeding.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Abuse of Process
-
Legal Privilege
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Beere v Bullock [2025] NZHC 3157
Cases Citing This Decision
10
Beere v Bullock
[2025] NZHC 3157
Mao v Kim
[2023] NZHC 3145
Khatri v Tomar
[2023] NZHC 2301
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0