NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Lew v Bluescope Distribution Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 794
HEARING DATE(S) : 14 July 2010 JURISDICTION : Equity
JUDGMENT OF : Pembroke J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 14 July 2010
DECISION : See judgment
CATCHWORDS : CAVEAT - removal - meaning of "serious issue" - commercial risk - competing registered interest - application of principles in Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank (1972) 126 CLR 161
LEGISLATION CITED : Real Property Act 1900
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Gay v Gooden (1989) NSW Conv R 55-445 Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank (1972) 126 CLR 161 Kerabee Park Pty Ltd v Daley [1972] 2 NSWLR 222 CASES CITED : Mango Media Pty Ltd v Garner Transport & Haulage Pty Ltd [2007] Martyn v Glennan [1979] 2 NSWLR 234 Morkaya v Parkinson [2010] NSWSC 596 Ruxan Pty Ltd v Peachme Pty Ltd [2004] NSWSC 1221 Uniting Church (NSW) Trust Association Ltd v Hill [2005] NSWSC 665
PARTIES : Peter John Lew Bluescope Distribution Pty Limited
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 2010/00229397
COUNSEL : D McFarlane - for the Plaintiff A Narayan - for the Defendant
SOLICITORS : Nelson Keane & Hemingway - for the Plaintiff DLA Phillips Fox - for the Defendant
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
PEMBROKE J
WEDNESDAY 14 JULY 2010
2010/00229397 - PETER JOHN LEW v BLUESCOPE DISTRIBUTION PTY LIMITED ACN 096 380 068
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT
1 HIS HONOUR: The plaintiff and his wife are the registered proprietors of a property known as 41 Thorby Avenue, Dubbo. They have entered into a contract for the sale of the land. That land is mortgaged to St George Bank. The mortgage is registered. The evidence before me indicates that the amount owing to St George Bank and secured by that mortgage is so great that there is no reasonable possibility of any of the net proceeds of sale being available to satisfy the interest of the defendant. 2 The interest of the defendant arises pursuant to a secured loan and guarantee dated 2 March 2005 between the plaintiff and a company owned and controlled by him, and the defendant by its former name. 3 The secured guarantee and indemnity provides that the plaintiff agrees to secure payment of the guaranteed moneys by charging all of his present and future interests in real property. It also provides that he consents as guarantor to the lodgement of a caveat or caveats to record the interest secured by the charge.
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