Gadd v Australia Business Executive Investments Pty Limited [2020] NSWDC 64

Gadd v Australia Business Executive Investments Pty Limited [2020] NSWDC 64

The review was allowed because, despite deficiencies in the second judgment debtor's evidence, there was no evidence that he had the ability to pay the judgment debt immediately and in full, and the proposed instalment arrangement would pay the whole judgment debt together with interest over a reasonable period; if default occurred, the judgment creditor would have other remedies. Each party was ordered to pay his own costs because the judgment creditor's opposition was understandable given the evidentiary deficiencies and the application succeeded only after further material was provided.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Practice and Procedure; Enforcement of Judgment / Notice of Motion Seeking Review of the Registrar's Refusal of an Application to Pay by Instalments
Outcome
Review of the Registrar's decision made on 23 December 2019 allowed; instalment order made against the second judgment debtor; each party to pay his own costs of the notice of motion.
Legal Topics
['application to Pay Judgment Debt by Instalments' "review of Registrar's Decision" "judgment Debtor's Means" 'costs of Notice of Motion']
['civil Procedure' 'judgment Enforcement'] ['application to Pay Judgment Debt by Instalments' "review of Registrar's Decision" "judgment Debtor's Means" 'costs of Notice of Motion']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Practice and Procedure; Enforcement of Judgment / Notice of Motion Seeking Review of the Registrar's Refusal of an Application to Pay by Instalments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Registrar's refusal of the application to pay the judgment debt by instalments should be reviewed and set aside." "Whether an instalment order should be made where the second judgment debtor's evidence of income and assets was deficient but there was no evidence that he could pay the judgment debt immediately and in full." 'Whether the proposed instalment plan was an appropriate way of satisfying the judgment debt over a reasonable period of time.' 'What costs order should be made on the notice of motion.']

Ratio Decidendi

The review was allowed because, despite deficiencies in the second judgment debtor's evidence, there was no evidence that he had the ability to pay the judgment debt immediately and in full, and the proposed instalment arrangement would pay the whole judgment debt together with interest over a reasonable period; if default occurred, the judgment creditor would have other remedies. Each party was ordered to pay his own costs because the judgment creditor's opposition was understandable given the evidentiary deficiencies and the application succeeded only after further material was provided.

Court Disposition

Review of the Registrar's decision made on 23 December 2019 allowed; instalment order made against the second judgment debtor; each party to pay his own costs of the notice of motion.

Orders

  • ['The review of the decision of the Registrar made on 23 December 2019, notified on 8 January 2020, is allowed.' 'The second judgment debtor Mark Alexander Erber is to pay to the judgment creditor the sum of $11,000 per month on the 10th day of each month commencing on 10 February 2020 until the judgment is paid in...