Khalid v Perpetual Limited

Khalid (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision concerning a contract for the sale of land. The property was subject to a mortgage, and the mortgagor defaulted on their home loan. The mortgagee, Perpetual Limited (the respondent), issued a default notice to the mortgagor under section 57(2)(b) of the *Real Property Act 1900* (NSW), and subsequently obtained a default judgment. The appellant contended that the amount claimed in the default notice was overstated and that the notice itself was invalid.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the default notice issued by the respondent was valid, and whether the default judgment should be set aside. Specifically, the court had to determine if the notice complied with the requirements of section 57(2)(b) of the *Real Property Act 1900*, and if a clause within the mortgage agreement could dispense with the statutory notice requirements. The appellant also argued that they had a sufficient interest to set aside the default judgment.

The Court of Appeal held that the section 57(2)(b) notice was valid. The court found that a clause within the mortgage agreement effectively dispensed with the notice requirements under the *Real Property Act 1900*, including those stipulated in section 57(2)(b), and that section 58A(1) of the Act permitted such a dispensation. Consequently, the court found no basis to set aside the default judgment.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal was ultimately dismissed. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.