Commonwealth Bank of Aust v Spengler P/L; Spengler P/L v Commonwealth Bank of Aust

The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Bank) sued Spengler P/L (Spengler), a property developer, in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Bank sought a declaration that it was not obliged to release part of its mortgage over Spengler's property in reliance on any promise or representation made by the Bank. Spengler counterclaimed for a declaration that the Bank was obliged to release part of its mortgage over its property in reliance on a representation or promise made by the Bank. The Bank also sued Spengler in a second proceeding for a declaration that Spengler had breached the terms of a loan agreement. Spengler counterclaimed for a declaration that the Bank was obliged to release part of its mortgage over its property in reliance on a promise or representation made by the Bank.

The court had to decide whether the Bank had promised or represented that it would allow a partial release of mortgage where the total trade dollar component of sales prices did not exceed 30 to 40 percent of the Bank's valuation of all units. The court also had to decide whether there was an implied term in the loan agreement that the Bank would grant partial releases of mortgage on reasonable terms. The court found that there was no express or implied term in the loan agreement that the Bank would allow a partial release of mortgage on the terms that Spengler contended. The court found that the Bank had not represented that it would allow a partial release of mortgage on the terms that Spengler contended. The court found that the Bank had not breached the loan agreement by refusing to allow a partial release of mortgage.

The court held that the Bank was not obliged to release part of its mortgage over Spengler's property in reliance on any promise or representation made by the Bank. The court held that Spengler had breached the terms of the loan agreement by failing to repay the loan on the due date. The court held that the Bank was entitled to judgment on its claim and on the counterclaim in action 7829 of 2002 and on its defence in action 6565 of 2001. The court ordered that Spengler pay the Bank the amount of the loan plus interest and costs.