National Australia Bank Ltd v C & O Voukidis Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 384

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: National Australia Bank Ltd v C & O Voukidis Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 384 Hearing dates: 28 February 2013; 1, 6 and 8 March 2013 Decision date: 03 April 2014 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Campbell J Decision: (1)Under Rule 13.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, judgment for the plaintiff for the possession of the whole of the land in folio identifier X/XXXXXX situated at and known as X XXXXX XXXXXX, Burwood in the State of New South Wales; (2)Leave to the plaintiff to issue a Writ of Possession in respect of the property identified in Order (1); (3)Under Rule 13.1 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, judgment for the plaintiff for the possession of the whole of the land in folio identifier X/XXXXXX situated at and known as XX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX, Drummoyne in the State of New South Wales; (4)Leave to the plaintiff to issue a Writ of Possession in respect of the property identified in Order (3); (5)Summary judgment for possession of the property referred to in the Statement of Claim as the Vincentia property is refused. (6)Leave granted to the first defendant to replead the matters averred in its proposed Amended Defence tendered as Exhibit 2 on 8th March 2013 in the form of any cross-claim it wishes to assert against the plaintiff within 21 days of the date hereof. (7)Leave granted to the fourth defendant to replead the matters averred against the plaintiff in her proposed First Amended Defence attached to her Notice of Motion filed on the 18th of January 2013 by way of Amended Cross Claim within 21 days of the date hereof. (8)List the matter for directions before the Common Law Case Management Registrar at 9 a.m. on Thursday 8th May 2014. (9)Costs of the various applications heard by me to abide the determination of the cross claims brought by the first and fourth defendants. (10)Reserve liberty to the parties to apply for variation of the costs order on 3 days prior written notice to my associate. Catchwords: PROCEDURE - civil - judgments and orders - summary judgment - whether there is an underlying defence that has a real or more than fanciful prospect of success Legislation Cited: Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) s 57 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 13 Cases Cited: GE Capital Australia v Davis & Ors (2002) 11 BPR 20,529; Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1971) 126 CLR 161; Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1972) 126 CLR 168; O'Brien v Bank of Western Australia Limited [2013] NSWCA 71; Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd v Paola [2010] NSWSC 997; Westpac Banking Corporation v Corry [2011] NSWSC 1041 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: National Australia Bank Ltd (plaintiff) C & O Voukidis Pty Ltd (first defendant) Olga Voukidis (fourth defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr P Reynolds (plaintiff) Ms S Haddad (first defendant) Mr D Ash (fourth defendant) Ms V Vallejo (cross-defendants to first cross claim) Solicitors: Gadens Lawyers (plaintiff) JBT Lawyers (first defendant) Carneys Lawyers (fourth defendant) File Number(s): 2012/00082867