Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd v Zepinic (No 5)

The case between Chateau Constructions (Aust) Ltd and Zepinic involved a dispute over a charge made by the plaintiff on the defendants' property. The defendants sought to set aside the declaration of the existence of the charge, which was made in their absence. The court found that the defendants had not provided an adequate explanation for their failure to appear, and no procedural basis existed to set aside the declaration. The court also determined that the defendants' substantive arguments for setting aside the declaration would not succeed in any event.

The legal issues in the case included the validity of the charge made by the plaintiff and the defendants' recent attempt to exercise their rights of termination of the contract. The court held that the defendants' recent actions did not affect the plaintiff's existing security rights under the charge. Additionally, the court confirmed the existing costs orders and reserved the issue of whether the defendants should be granted leave to cross-claim.

The court granted the plaintiff's motion for a judicial sale of the defendants' property, which was subject to the charge. Orders for the judicial sale of the property were made, with a stay on the sale until the plaintiff's costs were assessed. The court found that a sale in court by a trustee was appropriate due to the acrimonious nature of the dispute. The plaintiff was granted leave to bid at the public auction.

The court's final orders included the confirmation of the existing costs orders, the granting of leave to the plaintiff to bid at the public auction, and the stay on the sale of the property until the plaintiff's costs were assessed. The court reserved the issue of whether the defendants should be granted leave to cross-claim.