Elders Trustee & Executor Co. Pty Ltd v E.G. Reeves Pty Ltd & Ors [1987] FCA 604
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
JUDGMENT No. 04/81. Nor FOR DISTRIBUTION
e
»
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. G. 419 of 1986
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN: ELDERS TRUSTEE AND
EXECUTOR COMPANY PTY
LIMITED
Applicant
AND: E.G. REEVES PTY. LTD
First Respondent
AND: EDWARD GEORGE REEVES
Second Respondent
AND: DAPHNE JOAN REEVES
Third Respondent
JUDGE: GUMMOW J.
DATE: 3 November 1987
Reasons for Judgment
On 29 September 1987 I delivered reasons for judgment
in this matter. No formal orders were made. In those reasons I
indicated that the applicant should fail and that the first
respondent should succeed on the cross-claim. I stood the
Matter over to enable quantification of the sum payable on the
cross—clain.
At the trial, on the 7th day, 24 March 1987, senior
counsel for the parties had informed the Court (Transcript
p-p. 618-619) that they were agreed that there would p
issue between them as to the amount owing on the cross-claim.
The cross-claim pleaded failure by the Applicant, Elders
Trustee and Executor Company Pty. Ltd. ("Elders"), to pay E.G.
Reeves Pty. Ltd. ("the first respondent") the principal sum of
$490,000 secured by second mortgage from Elders to the first
respondent on the "Booka" property. It also alleged that there
had been a failure to pay certain interest on that principal
sum.
The reasons for judgment delivered on 29 September
1987 proceeded on the footing I have described.
Accordingly, as I have said, the matter was stood over
for what should have been a simple arithmetical calculation.
However, when the matter was next before the Court on 30
September and 1 October 1987 the parties informed the Court
that senior counsel had both been in error in what they had
said on 24 March 1987. It now appeared there was indeed an
area of dispute between the parties as to the calculation of
the monies due and owing and unpaid under the second mortgage.
Further, it was now said that time was necessary in order to
attempt a resolution of that dispute on the footing that if the
sum could not be agreed between the parties it would be
necessary for the first respondent to seek to re-open its case
on its cross-claim and for the parties to obtain a curial
determination as to the sum in question. The matter was
further mentioned before the Court on 16, 27 and 28 October and
it is now stood over to today, 3 November 1987.
--- = ory
I should also mention that there appear still to be on
foot certain proceedings between the first respondent and
Elders in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. I have now been
informed from the bar table that in one or more of those
proceedings there arise questions touching the quantification
of the claim under the second mortgage.
The proceedings in this Court were commenced on 30
September 1986. On 9 October 1986, a Judge of this Court made
the following orders:-
(1) Order that the first respondent E.G. Reeves
Pty. Ltd. be restrained until further order
from proceeding further in the Supreme Court
of New South Wales in Action numbered 1078
of 1986 commenced by the First Respondent
herein ...
(8) The Applicant pay to the ANZ Banking
Corporation, Martin Plaza the sum of
$484,000 to be held in interest bearing
deposit in the joint names of Warren Walter
Madgwick the Solicitor for the Applicant and
Patrick Lawrence Campbell Solicitor for the
Respondent pending final determination of
the proceedings herein.
(9) Costs of this application to be reserved.
The Court is now asked to make orders implementing the
reasons for judgment delivered on 29 September 1987 by
dismissing the application. The parties also join in seeking
further orders and directions dealing with the monies claimed
on the cross-claim. It is not clear that these further claims
will in truth be part of the matter (including the cross-claim
4.
in the accrued jurisdiction) presently before the Court.
determination of this question requires production of draft
amended pleadings.
directions made today.
In addition, the Court is asked to note the following
agreement between the parties:-
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
The applicant will within seven (7) days pay
to the first respondent the sum of $400,000
from the joint account in the names of the
respective solicitors for the parties
established pursuant to para 8 of the Short
Minutes of Orders made 9 October 1986.
Subject to payment of the said sum, the
respondents will consent to a stay of
execution of the judgment entered upon the
cross-claim until determination of any
appeal brought by the applicant.
The funds remaining in the said joint
account after payment of the said sum shall
remain therein on the present terms and
conditions.
In the event that any appeal brought by the
applicant is successful, the second
respondent undertakes to procure repayment
to the applicant of the said sum of
$400,000. Note that this undertaking is
given also to the Court.
This I will provide for in the orders and
5.
(e) The applicant undertakes to institute any
appeal within the period provided by the
Rules (or such further time as the Court may
on application allow) and to prosecute any
such appeal expeditiously.
The parties also seek to have all questions of costs
of the application and the cross-claim stood over to 18
November 1987 at 9.30am before me.
I now proceed as follows.
The Court notes the agreement between the parties in
the terms set out above and accepts the undertaking in
paragraph (d) thereof. The Court makes the orders and
directions set out hereunder:
(1) The application 1s dismissed.
(2) Direct the First Respondent to provide the
Applicant on or before 10 November 1987 with
draft amended cross-claim including claims
for monies allegedly due to it pursuant to
securities between it and the Applicant
other than the mortgage dated 22 August 1984
between the Applicant as mortgagor and the
First Respondent as mortgagee (being part of
Exhibit V) and to include such additional
prayers for relief as it may be advised.
(3)
(4)
(5)
Direct the Applicant to provide the First
Respondent on or before 17 November 1987
with draft defence to the said draft amended
cross-clain.
Direct that all questions of costs of the
application and of the cross-claim, and that
further proceedings on the cross-claim, be
stood over before me at 9.30am on 18
November 1987.
Direct that exhibits may be returned.
I certify that this and the preceding five
(5) preceding pages are a true copy of the
Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Mr Justice
Gummow.
Associate: Mate Mow .
Date: 3 November 1987
Counsel and Solicitors for M.J. Finane Q.C.
the Applicant. with G. Inatey and
R.N. Talbot
instructed by
Madgwicks,
solicitors.
Counsel and Solicitors for
the Respondents:
Date of Judgment:
W.H. Nicholas Q.C.
with B.R. McClintock
instructed by Messrs
Cutler Hughes and
Harris.
3 November 1987
Related laws
No related documents linked yet.
You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.