Lending 001 Pty Ltd v Dimarti

Lending 001 Pty Ltd instituted proceedings against Dimarti, seeking summary judgment for possession of a property secured by a mortgage. The central dispute was not whether the principal sum was owing under the mortgage, as both parties acknowledged this, but rather the amount that was still owing. The plaintiff aimed to obtain possession of the property, not an additional sum. The court had to determine if the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment given the nature of the defences raised by the defendant.

The legal issues before the court were whether the defences of predatory practices, relief under the Contracts Review Act, and breach of the National Credit Code were substantiated by any material facts. The court assessed whether the defences were adequately pleaded and if there were any substantive defences presented. Additionally, the court considered whether the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment in light of the defences raised and whether those defences should be struck out due to insufficient pleading.

The court found that the defences raised were not supported by any material facts, and the pleadings were repeatedly deficient in particularising the defences. The court held that the defendant had not demonstrated any substantive defence and was thus entitled to summary judgment. The court ruled that the defences should be struck out as they did not provide a substantive defence to the plaintiff's claim for possession.

The court ordered that judgment be entered in favour of the plaintiff, Lending 001 Pty Ltd, and granted possession of the property to the plaintiff. The court also ordered that the defendant's defences be struck out.