Toksoz v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] NSWCA 199

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Toksoz v Westpac Banking Corporation [2012] NSWCA 199 Hearing dates: 19 June 2012 Decision date: 03 July 2012 Before: Allsop ACJ at [1] Hoeben JA at [32] Sackville AJA at [33] Decision: 1.Appeal allowed in part. 2.Orders 1(1) and 1(3) made by the Supreme Court on 25 February 2011 and entered 1 March 2011 be varied by replacing the amounts of "$868,655.33" and "$742,836" respectively with "$801,664" and "$666,830.56" respectively. 3.Appeal otherwise dismissed. 4.The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. 5.Subject to rescission or variation upon receipt of any submissions by the appellant to the Court (such submissions and any affidavit in support to be filed and served within seven days) and the subsequent reconsideration of the question by the Court, direct the Registrar of the Court of Appeal to forward this judgment and the judgment of the primary judge to the relevant Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia administering social service benefits for single parents, to the Australian Taxation Office and to the Crime Commissions of New South Wales and the Commonwealth. 6.Grant leave to the parties to apply within 14 days for any special costs order or any order regarding the freezing of any property of the appellant. 7.Subject to rescission or variation upon receipt of submissions by the appellant to the Court (to be filed and served within seven days) and the subsequent reconsideration of the question by the Court, publication of any matter relating to these proceedings to the extent that it might tend to identify persons who are or were customers of the respondent bank by name or unique identifiers in relation to such persons be prohibited. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: FRAUD - tracing of proceeds - sufficiency of proof - husband of appellant defrauded bank of over $1m - large unexplained sums in appellant's bank accounts - appellant's only income a single parent pension - no evidence of legitimate or honest source of moneys - inference as to source of funds