Summary: This case involves an appeal by OZ Optics Ltd. and Omur Sezerman against XL Insurance Company PLC and its legal representatives, challenging the lower court's ruling that there was no conflict of interest during their prior joint representation. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the motion judge's decision.

Key Points:

• Background: OZ Optics and its CEO Omur Sezerman were previously represented by counsel who also represented their insurance carrier, XL Insurance Company PLC. The dispute arose over alleged conflicts of interest during this dual representation.
• Lower Court Ruling: The Superior Court of Justice, under Justice Jessica Kimmel, found no conflict of interest. The court noted that the legal representatives withdrew from representing OZ Optics on October 3, 2017, effectively avoiding a conflict by ceasing to represent both parties once their interests became misaligned.
• Appeal Decision: The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision, agreeing that the motion judge made no legal errors or significant factual mistakes in her assessment. The judges supported her conclusions about the timely withdrawal of the lawyers from representing OZ Optics, which prevented any conflict of interest.

Outcome:

• The appeal was dismissed with the reasons provided by the motion judge being deemed careful and cogent.
• Costs were awarded to the respondents in the amount of $17,500, all-inclusive.

This case emphasizes the importance of legal representatives maintaining clear boundaries to avoid conflicts of interest, particularly when representing multiple clients with potentially diverging interests.