A liquidator's continuation of proceedings to recover assets sufficient to cover the liquidator's costs, expenses, remuneration and outstanding creditor claims is not an abuse of process merely because the litigation funder will also benefit. The onus on a defendant to prove improper purpose under Williams v Spautz is not discharged by showing that the litigation funder is a creditor or that recovery may exceed outstanding claims. Hall v Poolman does not authorise a stay mid-trial to require liquidators to quantify all outstanding claims before continuing recovery proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.