PANGAS v PANGAS (ALSO KNOWN AS ROBYNNE LANETTE LORD) [1997] NSWCA 242

PANGAS v PANGAS (ALSO KNOWN AS ROBYNNE LANETTE LORD)

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL

POWELL JA, COLE JA and BROWNIE AJA 27 March 1997

[1997] NSWCA 242

Brownie AJA. This is an appeal from a judgment of Bryson J delivered on 22 November 1995. His Honour was concerned with a dispute as to competing priorities between the two instruments.

The appellant, Peter Pangas, owns some land in Hunter Street, Sydney. He has, it is said, given a mortgage to his brother, the appellant Winston Pangas, dated 1991. That mortgage was lodged for registration on 23 May 1995. It was not then accompanied by the certificate of title, so that the Registrar General issued a requisition dated the same day in which the Registrar General said that unless the certificate of title was produced within two months of that date, the dealing would be rejected.

It seems that the certificate of title was not produced within that time limit. However, before the application for registration was rejected by force of that requisition and the non-compliance with it, a second instrument was lodged with the Registrar General on 14 July 1995. That was anapplication by the respondent, Robynne Pangas, to record a writ of execution which she had caused to be issued to enforce a judgment of the Supreme Court. The Registrar General did record that writ on the Register.

The dispute before Bryson J was whether the writ had priority over the mortgage. His Honour made a declaration that the writ had priority. The appellants now complain, first, that his Honour should have adjourned the proceedings when they came before him upon the ground that the appellant, Winston Pangas, was ill and in hospital.

His Honour recorded that Mrs Cominos, who then appeared for the respondents at least on the second day of the hearing before his Honour, had been unable to point out to him any matter relating to the facts in issue on which Mr Winston Pangas might be able to give evidence. His Honour also referred to the history of the matter and refused an adjournment.