Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Adventure Quest Paintball-Skirmish Pty Limited; Woollard v Hodgson; Hodgson v Woollard [2016] NSWSC 188

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Adventure Quest Paintball-Skirmish Pty Limited; Woollard v Hodgson; Hodgson v Woollard [2016] NSWSC 188

The court found that the guarantee executed by Mr Woollard was binding for all money owed by Adventure Quest to ANZ, as the statutory assumptions applied to the execution of the 2009 loan agreement by the company, and ANZ had no knowledge or suspicion of any lack of authority or forgery. Mr Woollard was found jointly and severally liable under the guarantee and mortgage. The guarantee was not unjust within the meaning of the Contracts Review Act, and Mr Woollard had no defence against ANZ. On the cross-claims, contribution was apportioned between Mr Woollard and Mr Hodgson, consistent with their equal liability as co-guarantors.

Parties
Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant to First Cross Claim/second Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited; First Defendant: Adventure Quest Paintball-Skirmish Pty Limited; Second Defendant/first Cross Defendant to First Cross Claim/cross Claimant to Second Cross Claim: Andrew Mark Hodgson; Third Defendant/cross Claimant to First Cross Claim/first Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim: Kim Garnet Woollard
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the third defendant; judgment for the first and second cross-defendants on the first cross-claim; judgment for the cross-claimant on the second cross-claim.
Legal Topics
Guarantee, Forgery, Statutory Assumptions, Contribution, Unconscionable Conduct

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited

Plaintiff/second Cross Defendant to First Cross Claim/second Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim

Adventure Quest Paintball-Skirmish Pty Limited

First Defendant

Andrew Mark Hodgson

Second Defendant/first Cross Defendant to First Cross Claim/cross Claimant to Second Cross Claim

Kim Garnet Woollard

Third Defendant/cross Claimant to First Cross Claim/first Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim

Procedural Posture

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the guarantee binds the third defendant for advances made under a loan agreement he allegedly did not authorise or sign
  2. 2 Whether statutory assumptions under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) apply in favour of ANZ
  3. 3 Whether forgeries of signatures on loan or guarantee documents affect enforceability

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the guarantee executed by Mr Woollard was binding for all money owed by Adventure Quest to ANZ, as the statutory assumptions applied to the execution of the 2009 loan agreement by the company, and ANZ had no knowledge or suspicion of any lack of authority or forgery. Mr Woollard was found jointly and severally liable under the guarantee and mortgage. The guarantee was not unjust within the meaning of the Contracts Review Act, and Mr Woollard had no defence against ANZ. On the cross-claims, contribution was apportioned between Mr Woollard and Mr Hodgson, consistent with their equal liability as co-guarantors.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the third defendant; judgment for the first and second cross-defendants on the first cross-claim; judgment for the cross-claimant on the second cross-claim.

Orders

  • Judgment for the plaintiff against the third defendant.
  • Plaintiff has leave to issue forthwith a writ for possession of land at Certificate of Title Folio Identifier 139/751656, 12 Singleton Road, East Kurrajong (also known as 1200 Putty Road, Blaxlands Ridge), NSW.