National Australia Bank v Hain aka McCallum

In the Federal Court of Australia, the matter of National Australia Bank v Hain (also known as McCallum) arose, where the bank sought summary judgment against the defendant for possession of a property, as stipulated under section 84(4) of the Stamp Duties Act. The bank argued that the defendant had failed to pay a stamp duty on a mortgage and thus, the bank was entitled to enforce the mortgage and gain possession of the property.

The court had to decide whether the bank was entitled to seek summary judgment, and if so, whether the defendant's failure to pay the stamp duty justified the bank's claim for possession. The main legal issue was whether the bank's claim was valid under section 84(4) of the Stamp Duties Act, and whether the defendant's failure to pay the stamp duty constituted a breach warranting possession of the property.

The court found that the bank's claim for summary judgment was valid under section 84(4) of the Stamp Duties Act. The court noted that the defendant's failure to pay the stamp duty was a breach of the Act, and the bank was entitled to enforce the mortgage and gain possession of the property. The court further held that the defendant's failure to respond to the bank's proceedings justified the grant of summary judgment in the bank's favour. The court ruled in favour of the bank, granting the summary judgment sought and possession of the property.