Ribchenkov v Suncorp-Metway Limited [2001] FCA 151

Ribchenkov v Suncorp-Metway Limited [2001] FCA 151

It would be unconscionable for Suncorp-Metway Limited to enforce the mortgage against Ribchenkov for advances made in April 1994 and July 1995. Suncorp-Metway is entitled to judgment against Ribchenkov for $190,079.47 (the first advance with appropriate deductions and allowable costs), with judgment for Ribchenkov against Sapuppo for the same sum, and indemnity to Sapuppo by his insurer, less the deductible. Costs are apportioned: Suncorp-Metway pays Ribchenkov party/party costs on issues relating to the second and third advances; Ribchenkov pays Suncorp-Metway solicitor/own client costs for the first advance. Sapuppo pays Ribchenkov the costs she is required to pay Suncorp-Metway;...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Mortgage/contract/negligence Application and Cross Claims / Judgment and Costs Orders After Reasons
Outcome
Judgment for Suncorp-Metway against Ribchenkov for $190,079.47; Judgment for Ribchenkov against Sapuppo for $190,079.47; costs awarded and apportioned as specified; insurer ordered to indemnify subject to deductible.
Legal Topics
['mortgage Enforcement' "solicitor's Duty of Care" 'indemnity Insurance' 'costs (solicitor and Own Client/party and Party)' 'unconscionable Conduct']
['contract Law' 'banking & Finance Law' 'insurance Law' 'torts (negligence)' 'civil Procedure'] ['mortgage Enforcement' "solicitor's Duty of Care" 'indemnity Insurance' 'costs (solicitor and Own Client/party and Party)' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Mortgage/contract/negligence Application and Cross Claims / Judgment and Costs Orders After Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Suncorp-Metway Limited could enforce the mortgage for all advances against Ribchenkov' 'Whether certain advances under the mortgage were unenforceable as unconscionable' 'Whether Sapuppo was negligent in his duty as solicitor to the applicant' 'Whether insurance company was required to indemnify Sapuppo against liability/costs under the policy' 'Proper apportionment and basis (party/party or solicitor/client) for costs between various parties given partial success/failure on claims']

Ratio Decidendi

It would be unconscionable for Suncorp-Metway Limited to enforce the mortgage against Ribchenkov for advances made in April 1994 and July 1995. Suncorp-Metway is entitled to judgment against Ribchenkov for $190,079.47 (the first advance with appropriate deductions and allowable costs), with judgment for Ribchenkov against Sapuppo for the same sum, and indemnity to Sapuppo by his insurer, less the deductible. Costs are apportioned: Suncorp-Metway pays Ribchenkov party/party costs on issues relating to the second and third advances; Ribchenkov pays Suncorp-Metway solicitor/own client costs for the first advance. Sapuppo pays Ribchenkov the costs she is required to pay Suncorp-Metway;...

Court Disposition

Judgment for Suncorp-Metway against Ribchenkov for $190,079.47; Judgment for Ribchenkov against Sapuppo for $190,079.47; costs awarded and apportioned as specified; insurer ordered to indemnify subject to deductible.

Orders

  • ['It would be unconscionable for Suncorp-Metway Limited to enforce the bill of mortgage L368425D against Alevtina Ribchenkov in respect of the advances in April 1994 and July 1995.' 'Judgment for Suncorp-Metway Limited against Alevtina Ribchenkov in the amount of $190,079.47.' 'Judgment for Alevtina Ribchenkov...