Gooley v NSW Rural Assistance Authority [2017] NSWSC 835
The certificate was not invalid because GFH's garnishee order enforced the District Court judgment debt, not a farm mortgage as defined by the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (NSW). The security over farming properties was not part of the District Court judgment orders and was a separate non-curial event. Accordingly, the Act did not apply and non-compliance with it provided no basis to impugn the certificate.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 June 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review of a Certificate Issued Pursuant to S 11(1) of the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (nsw) / Summons of 20 December 2016 Heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Outcome
- The summons of 20 December 2016 was dismissed and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay GFH's costs of the proceedings before Button J.
- Legal Topics
- ['judicial Review' 'farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (nsw) Certificate' 'farm Mortgage' 'enforcement Action' 'garnishee Order' 'judgment Debt' 'discretionary Refusal of Relief' 'costs']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of a Certificate Issued Pursuant to S 11(1) of the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (nsw) / Summons of 20 December 2016 Heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether enforcement of the District Court judgment debt by way of garnishee order was enforcement action in respect of a farm mortgage under the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (NSW).' 'Whether the s 11(1) certificate issued by the NSW Rural Assistance Authority was invalid because enforcement action occurred before mediation under the Act.' 'Whether relief should be refused in any event because of delay, waiver, acquiescence or futility.']
Ratio Decidendi
The certificate was not invalid because GFH's garnishee order enforced the District Court judgment debt, not a farm mortgage as defined by the Farm Debt Mediation Act 1994 (NSW). The security over farming properties was not part of the District Court judgment orders and was a separate non-curial event. Accordingly, the Act did not apply and non-compliance with it provided no basis to impugn the certificate.
Court Disposition
The summons of 20 December 2016 was dismissed and the plaintiffs were ordered to pay GFH's costs of the proceedings before Button J.
Orders
- ['The summons of 20 December 2016 is dismissed.' 'The plaintiffs, Mr Paul Gooley and Mrs Susan Gooley, must pay the costs of the defendant, George & Fuhrmann (Holdings) Pty Ltd, of the proceedings before me.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment