Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
McLean v Westpac Banking Corporation [2013] FCA 126 Citation: McLean v Westpac Banking Corporation [2013] FCA 126
Parties: SHONA DIMITY MCLEAN v WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION, GAIL KELLY, BRIAN CAMERON SMITH, BETTY VENTOURIS and JOHN PAPASPIROS
File number: WAD 293 of 2012
Judge: MCKERRACHER J
Date of judgment: 22 February 2013
Catchwords: ESTOPPEL – Anshun estoppel – whether applicant's pleading of forgery and unconscionable conduct by bank officials should have been made in previous proceedings MORTGAGES – applicant defaulted on mortgage repayments – applicant contended the first respondent was not entitled to enforce loan agreement – whether applicant's pleading of 'securitisation' had merit – meaning of 'securitisation' – accord and satisfaction plea PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – McKenzie Friend – applicable principles PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – summary judgment – abuse of process – attempt to re-litigate issues ventilated in various State courts – no reasonable prospect of success
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 26.01
Cases cited: Carl Zeiss Stiftung v Rayner & Keeler Ltd (No 2) [1967] 1 AC 853 McLean v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] WASCA 152 Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 589 R v EJ Smith [1982] 2 NSWLR 608 Schagen v R (1993) 8 WAR 410 Smith v R (1985) 159 CLR 532 Westpac Banking Corporation v McLean [2012] WASC 182
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate