The Court declined to grant ex-parte interlocutory relief seeking to restrain the sale of property and to set aside consent orders, finding no serious question to be tried on the allegations of fraud and misleading the Court, and that the balance of convenience did not favour granting relief without notice to the respondents. The Court held that where a motion involves allegations of fraud against respondents and their solicitors, those parties must be given the opportunity to be heard, and that purchasers whose rights would be affected by an injunction restraining a sale must be joined to the proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members.