Australia, Aug. 11 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on July 11:

1. THE COURT: Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd (MWP) is a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. Mr Michael Earl Wilson is a solicitor, with an entitlement to practise in New South Wales, although he resides in Kazakhstan. For many years, there has been litigation between MWP and the respondent, Mr John Forster Emmott. It is unnecessary to summarise that litigation, and to do so would substantially add to the length of these reasons to no useful end.

2. MWP brought four applications which are before the Court as presently constituted. Two are applications to review interlocutory decisions of Judges of Appeal ordering modest amounts of security for costs against MWP in respect of appeals or applications for leave to appeal which MWP has brought from orders made in separate proceedings in the Equity and Common Law Divisions of this Court. The other two are applications by MWP to adjourn MWP's own applications for review. In each case - save for an aspect of further written submissions concerning a complaint about a failure of one judge to recuse himself, which is addressed at the conclusion of these reasons - Mr Wilson appeared for MWP.

3. We dismissed the adjournment applications at the hearing on 20 June 2025 indicating that we would give reasons later; our reasons are at [14]-[25] below. We proceeded to hear the applications for review of the decisions to order security for costs. Unfortunately, it was necessary for the Court to obtain and supply to the parties a copy of the transcript of the application for security for costs before McHugh JA because it had not been tendered at the hearing before us and there was a dispute about what the judge had disclosed and whether Mr Wilson on behalf of MWP had made an application for recusal which was refused. Although this Court made directions for the swift exchange of submissions, MWP did not comply with them, and when submissions were supplied, they gave rise to a very serious issue. All this has delayed delivering judgment.

4. The most recent aspects of the litigation, which give rise to the four applications made to this Court, may be summarised as follows. They derive from orders made by the Supreme Court in its Equity Division, constituted by Hammerschlag CJ in Eq, and its Common Law Division, constituted by Schmidt AJ. Basten AJA orders security for costs

5. MWP sought an account of benefits received by Mr Emmott as a partner of "the Temujin Partnership". On 26 August 2024, that claim was set down for trial in the Equity Division, over the opposition of MWP, on 18 November 2024. MWP sought leave to appeal from that decision, but its application was dismissed: Michael Wilson & Partners v Emmott [2024] NSWCA 269. MWP made various attempts to vacate that hearing. They failed. On 13 November 2024, MWP filed a motion seeking to vacate the hearing, which was made returnable on the first day of the trial. That application, and a further application made on that day, were refused after argument (MWP being represented by senior counsel who seems to have been retained only to appear on the applications, rather than the final hearing), for reasons that were given shortly thereafter: Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd as the assignee of Robert Colin Nicholls & Temujin International Limited (as trustee of Temujin International (trading) Trust) & Temujin Services Limited v Emmott - Final [2024] NSWSC 1489.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/197f63afacce088493ba1991)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.