Stockl v Rigura Pty Ltd

The Supreme Court of Queensland considered an appeal by Mr Rigl (the appellant) against Rigura Pty Ltd (the respondent) concerning the exercise of a mortgagee's power of sale. The dispute centred on whether the mortgagee had acted in good faith when selling the mortgaged property.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the mortgagee's power of sale had been exercised in good faith, particularly in light of the sale price achieved. This involved determining the significance of expert valuation evidence, the outcome of advertising efforts, and whether an unaccepted offer could be considered in assessing whether the property was sold at an undervalue. The Court also considered whether it was proper to advertise the sale as a "mortgagee sale" and whether an independent valuation was required before setting a reserve price or accepting an offer.

The Court reasoned that the mortgagee's duty of good faith in exercising a power of sale requires the mortgagee to take reasonable steps to obtain a proper price. The Court noted that while an independent valuation is a prudent step, it is not an absolute requirement. The Court found that the advertising campaign conducted was adequate and that the unaccepted offer, while potentially relevant, did not demonstrate that the sale was at an undervalue. The Court also held that advertising a sale as a "mortgagee sale" is not inherently improper.

Ultimately, the Court refused leave to amend the Notice of Appeal and dismissed the appeal. The parties were directed to file written submissions regarding costs.