Global Custodians Limited v Mesh [2001] NSWSC 447

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Global Custodians Limited v Mesh [2001] NSWSC 447 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2539/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 9 and 14 May 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 1 June 2001

Global Custodians Ltd (P1) John Healey Speight and Jessie Barrie Marr Speight (P2) PARTIES : Archie Greenlees and Norma Patricia Greenlees (P3) Pamela Ann Mesh and Helen Chuproff (D1 & 2) Hari Bhagat (D3) JUDGMENT OF : Young CJ in Eq

G C Lindsay SC and R F Margo (P) COUNSEL : L Robinson (D1 & 2) Third defendant in person SOLICITORS : Holding Redlich (P) Third defendant in person CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE [692]- Contempt- Issue of criminal summonses to witnesses before Supreme Court- Allegation that witness perverted the course of justice. Annotated Criminal Legislation NSW (1999/2000 ed) LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes Act 1900, s 319 Criminal Procedure Act 1986, ss 10 and 50 Supreme Court Act, s 23 Ex parte Qantas Airways Ltd; Re Horsington (1969) 71 SR (NSW) 291 CASES CITED : Thames Launches Ltd v Trinity House Corporation [1961] Ch 197 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378 DECISION : See paras 34, 35 and 36.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION

YOUNG CJ in Eq

FRIDAY 1 JUNE 2001

2539/98 - GLOBAL CUSTODIANS LIMITED v MESH

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: These proceedings were commenced by summons filed 22 May 1998 whereby the plaintiff sought a declaration that the trust deed of the Estate Mortgage Fighting Trust had not been validly amended and for orders that it examine the books and records of the Trust. 2 The prime submission of the plaintiff, now the first plaintiff, was that the trustees collected moneys from the public to maintain litigation with an aim to recover moneys from the failed Estate Mortgage Trusts, but that the trust deed was invalidly amended to allow moneys to be paid as expenses to the third defendant and others to travel to and from India and that, in fact, considerable moneys had been used for this purpose. 3 The defendants deny that the first plaintiff has standing. The first plaintiff claims that it has an assignment from the people who are now the other plaintiffs, Mr and Mrs Speight and Mr and Mrs Greenlees who claim that they were subscribers to the Trust. The defendants deny that those other plaintiffs were ever subscribers to the Trust. 4 On 9 December 1998, the first plaintiff filed a notice of motion for separate issues to be determined. I heard that notice of motion on 19 May 1999. Mr Margo of counsel appeared for the first plaintiff, Mesdames Robinson and Macrae appeared for the first and second defendants (the trustees) and the third defendant appeared in person. After hearing evidence and submissions I reserved judgment which I handed down on 25 June 1999 ([1999] NSWSC 624).