NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Hopkins v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited & Anor [2017] NSWSC 1461 Hearing dates: 17 October 2017 Decision date: 26 October 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Black J Decision: The Court holds that the First Defendant/Cross-Claimant is entitled to the relief sought in its Notice of Motion filed 4 September 2017 and that the Plaintiff's/Fourth Cross-Defendant's Notice of Motion filed 19 September 2017 should be dismissed. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Motion seeking orders to give effect to settlement of proceedings – where settlement terms entitle mortgagee to vacant possession and writ of possession if sale not effected by mortgagor on terms reasonably acceptable to mortgagee – whether sale effected on terms reasonably acceptable to mortgagee Legislation Cited: - Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 73 Cases Cited: - Ahmed v Chowdhury [2011] NSWSC 893 - Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 - Sugar Australia Pty Ltd v Lend Lease Services Pty Ltd [2015] VSCA 98 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Cheryl Dianne Hopkins (Plaintiff/Fourth Cross-Defendant) Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (First Defendant/Cross-Claimant) Representation: Counsel: T. Hall (Solicitor – Plaintiff/Fourth Cross-Defendant) M A Ashhurst SC/C E Bannan (First Defendant/Cross-Claimant)
Solicitors: Hall Partners (Plaintiff/Fourth Cross-Defendant) Kemp Strang (First Defendant/Cross-Claimant) File Number(s): 2016/173550
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