or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court gives supplementary judgment in proceedings concerning the funds of a ward of court, determining that: (a) no final order was necessary where there was little to be gained from the preparation of further reports on the transactions where the documentation and narrative now supplied amounted to sufficient compliance with the obligation that an account be provided; and (b) it was the absence of regular and complete statements that had led to the litigation and the work involved in obtaining the necessary information, and therefore the costs of engaging the expert accountants should be met by the investment firm as it was its failure that had led to the plaintiffs' inability to understand the transactions.
Supplementary judgment determining whether the defendants had adequately met the obligation identified in the principal judgment that an account be given of the management of the funds of a ward of the High Court - plaintiffs are joint committee of the ward of court - no funds left from what was lodged in the High Court for the benefit of the ward of court - plaintiffs brought summary proceedings seeking an order for the defendants to give an account of the management of the funds - principal judgment concluded that defendants had an obligation akin to that of a trustee or fiduciary to furnish a record of transactions in the form of an account and narrative - following the principal judgment, first defendant had furnished a report - expert reports on this account commissioned by the parties - whether the report since provided to the plaintiffs is sufficient account of the transactions such that a final order was not required - whether the plaintiffs or the defendants should be required to pay the costs of the expert witnesses.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.