The plaintiffs appealed a Master's order removing their lawyer of record to the Divisional Court.
A preliminary jurisdictional issue arose regarding whether the order was final or interlocutory.
The Divisional Court held that, based on established jurisprudence, an order removing a lawyer of record is interlocutory in nature.
Consequently, the appeal properly lies to a judge of the Superior Court of Justice, not the Divisional Court.
The appeal was quashed for lack of jurisdiction.
