Hubner v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd

The case involved a dispute between Hubner and Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. The defendant bank sought a default judgment against the plaintiff, who claimed that the judgment was irregularly and improperly obtained. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The central issue was whether the default judgment was obtained in a manner that complied with the relevant procedural rules and whether the bank had the right to bring an ejectment action against the defaulting mortgagor under Order 6 Rule 7 of the Supreme Court Rules.

The court examined the procedural steps taken by the bank to obtain the default judgment and whether the writ was properly endorsed under Order 6 Rule 7 or Order 6 Rule 11. It was also considered whether the Registrar had the power to enter a default judgment under Order 31 Rule 7. The court further analysed the rights of a registered mortgagee to bring an ejectment action against a defaulting mortgagor in light of the Land Title Act 1994 and the rule-making power of the Court. After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the court found that the default judgment was irregularly and improperly obtained, and the bank did not have the right to bring an ejectment action against the defaulting mortgagor under Order 6 Rule 7 after the enactment of the Land Title Act 1994.

The court concluded that the defendant bank's application for a default judgment was invalid due to procedural errors, and the writ was not properly endorsed. Additionally, the court held that the Registrar did not have the power to enter a default judgment under Order 31 Rule 7. The final orders of the court included setting aside the default judgment, dismissing the bank's application for ejectment, and ordering the bank to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceeding.