National Australia Bank Limited v Convy

The matter before the court involved National Australia Bank Limited as the mortgagee and Convy as the mortgagor. The dispute centred on Convy's application to halt the enforcement of a writ of possession, which was their fifth such application. Convy sought the delay to enable the refinancing of the mortgaged property. The application was made at a late stage, prompting the court to consider the adequacy of the evidence provided by Convy in support of their refinancing proposal.

The legal issues for the court to determine were whether the evidence Convy had presented was sufficient to justify a further delay and whether the proposed refinancing would be viable. The court had to balance the need to protect the mortgagor's rights against the mortgagee's interest in timely repayment of the debt. Given that the sale of the property would ensure the mortgagee was repaid in full, the court also had to consider the implications of a two-month delay on both parties.

The court found that the evidence Convy provided was inadequate to substantiate their refinancing proposal. Despite the potential for the mortgagee to be repaid in full upon sale, the court was concerned about the consequences of a further delay. After weighing the interests of both parties, the court granted a two-month stay to allow Convy additional time to secure the necessary financing. However, the court emphasised that any further delays would not be tolerated.