Reavill Farm v AR Mortgages Pty Limited

The matter before the court was an application by the plaintiff, Reavill Farm, for an interlocutory restraining order over livestock against the defendant, AR Mortgages Pty Limited. The plaintiff sought to prevent the defendant from exercising a right to seize and sell the plaintiff's livestock, which were secured by a mortgage. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court had to decide whether the plaintiff had demonstrated a serious question to be tried regarding the validity of the mortgage, and if the balance of convenience favoured the granting of the restraining order. The court considered the plaintiff's submissions that the mortgage was void due to the defendant's failure to comply with statutory requirements, and the plaintiff's argument that the sale of the livestock would cause irreparable harm. The court also weighed the potential prejudice to the defendant if the restraining order was granted.

The court found that the plaintiff had not established a serious question to be tried on the validity of the mortgage, as the statutory requirements were not clearly breached. The court noted that the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence to support its claims. The court further held that the balance of convenience did not favour the plaintiff, as the defendant would suffer significant prejudice if the restraining order was granted. Consequently, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for the restraining order.

No further orders were made by the court. The plaintiff was required to bear the costs of the application.