Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Singh

Case •

[2016] NSWSC 1115

•

12 August 2016

No judgment structure available for this case.

Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Singh [2016] NSWSC 1115
Hearing dates:12 August 2016
Date of orders: 12 August 2016
Decision date: 12 August 2016
Jurisdiction:Common Law
Before: Davies J
Decision:

1. The Defence filed by the First Defendant on 17 June 2016 in the proceedings is struck out.
2. The Plaintiff is given leave to file immediately an application for default judgment for possession of the property at 18 Hicks Close, Abercrombie, New South Wales.
3. No orders as to costs.

Catchwords: REAL PROPERTY – mortgages – possession of land – defendant made bankrupt after defence filed – trustee not taking any steps to defend or prosecute cross-claim – defence struck out
Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Plaintiff)
Parminder Singh (Defendant)
Representation:

Counsel:
R Pillay (Plaintiff)
No appearance (Defendant)

  Solicitors:
Gadens Lawyers (Plaintiff)
Unrepresented (Defendant)
File Number(s):2016/46301

Judgment

  1. The Plaintiff commenced these proceedings on 1 February 2016 seeking possession of land as a result of a default under a loan agreement entered into on 29 September 2006 and a mortgage which secured that loan agreement. A default had occurred by 3 June 2015.

  2. The Defendant filed a Defence on 17 June 2016 which, apart from denying matters contained in the Statement of Claim, made vague allegations that the Defendant did not know of the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and was given no opportunity to negotiate alterations to the terms of that agreement.

  3. The Defence also appeared to make a claim against the Plaintiff for what is said to be misleading and deceptive conduct that arose after an admitted default by the Defendant under the loan agreement.

  4. The Defendant was made bankrupt on 19 July 2016. Notice was given to the Defendant's trustee by letter dated 26 July 2016. The trustee replied saying that "As the secured creditor's rights are not affected by the bankruptcy the trustee would not be taking any steps in the proceedings."

  5. The Defence as filed does not disclose a defence to the claim and to the extent that the claim for misleading and deceptive conduct constitutes a cross-claim, the Trustee by his letter has abandoned that cross-claim.

  6. In all the circumstances, the Defence of 17 June 2016 is struck out and the Plaintiff is given leave to move immediately for default judgment.

**********

Decision last updated: 15 August 2016

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0