Galloway v National Australia Bank Limited

The case of Galloway v National Australia Bank Limited involved the applicant, Galloway, and the respondent, National Australia Bank Limited. The dispute arose from an urgent application by Galloway to prevent the sale of a property that was subject to a mortgage held by the bank. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Galloway sought to restrain the sale of the property, arguing that the mortgagee's consent was required for the sale, and that there was a residential tenancy in place, which provided an additional layer of protection against the sale.

The primary legal issue for the court to decide was whether the bank was required to obtain Galloway's consent before selling the mortgaged property, given the existence of a residential tenancy. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the balance of convenience favoured Galloway's application to restrain the sale. The court needed to weigh the rights of the mortgagor against those of the mortgagee, and whether the presence of a residential tenancy altered the balance of convenience in favour of Galloway.

In its judgment, the court held that the bank was not required to obtain Galloway's consent for the sale of the property. The court found that the existence of a residential tenancy did not change the fundamental nature of the mortgage agreement, nor did it impose additional requirements on the mortgagee regarding the sale of the property. Furthermore, the court determined that the balance of convenience did not favour Galloway's application to restrain the sale. The court noted that the mortgagee had already obtained a judgment for possession, and that the sale of the property was an appropriate means to realise the security held by the bank. Consequently, the application to restrain the sale was dismissed.