P. Malysheuski

In an ongoing governance dispute concerning a Gurdwara, the case management judge issued directions regarding multiple related proceedings.

The court granted the current board of directors leave to commence an action against former directors for costs previously paid to a law firm, and permitted a third-party claim against the law firm.

The court also stayed a related small claims action and a costs assessment proceeding pending a peremptory case management conference to determine how all related matters should be adjudicated.

In a case management endorsement concerning governance disputes over a Gurdwara, the court granted leave for the corporation to commence an action against former directors for costs paid to a law firm, and for the former directors to bring a third-party claim against the law firm.

The court also stayed related small claims and costs assessment proceedings pending a further case management conference to determine whether the court should assume case management responsibility over all related matters.

Members of a religious community incorporated under the Corporations Act disputed control of the corporation administering their temple.

After a consent order established a three-person board, the applicants sought recognition of two additional directors allegedly appointed by the community's spiritual leader and invalidation of steps taken by the existing board.

The court held that the evidence of the alleged appointments was inadmissible and unreliable hearsay, and in any event the consent order circumscribed any authority to appoint additional directors pending an annual members meeting.

The application was dismissed, and the matter was directed into case management with related proceedings.

The respondent insurer sought its legal expenses following the dismissal of the appellant estate's appeal regarding statutory accident benefits.

The Director's Delegate extended the time to request an expense hearing, finding the delay reasonable pending a judicial review application.

The Delegate awarded costs to the respondent, noting it was completely successful and the appeal lacked merit, as the estate had no standing to claim the benefits.

The Delegate ordered the appellant's counsel to personally pay the respondent's costs, fixed at $5,755.84, finding that counsel caused expenses to be incurred without reasonable cause by pursuing the appeal instead of commencing a new application in the proper party's name.