Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v James (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 832

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v James (No 3) [2019] NSWSC 832

Mr James failed to establish he was misled or relied on ANZ's alleged nondisclosure; no reasonable expectation existed for disclosure of realisations, and evidence showed he was likely on notice as to recoveries and shortfall, thus not entitled to relief; delay and lack of loss also disentitled him; application to set aside consent judgment dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Consent Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['consent Judgment' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'duties of Receivers' 'australian Consumer Law' 'corporations Act S 420 A' 'delay in Application' 'good Faith']
['equity' 'commercial Law'] ['consent Judgment' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'duties of Receivers' 'australian Consumer Law' 'corporations Act S 420 A' 'delay in Application' 'good Faith']

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

Notice of Motion / Application to Set Aside Consent Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether ANZ engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by silence' 'Whether defendant relied on alleged non-disclosure by ANZ' 'Whether consent judgment should be set aside' 'Scope of disclosure obligations under Code of Banking Practice and guarantees' "Defendant's delay in seeking to set aside judgment" 'Whether defendant has an arguable defence under s 420A Corporations Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr James failed to establish he was misled or relied on ANZ's alleged nondisclosure; no reasonable expectation existed for disclosure of realisations, and evidence showed he was likely on notice as to recoveries and shortfall, thus not entitled to relief; delay and lack of loss also disentitled him; application to set aside consent judgment dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ["Defendant's notice of motion filed on 19 September 2017 is dismissed with costs."]