Friend v Reavill Farm Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 1978

Friend v Reavill Farm Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 1978

The stay was refused because the defendants' evidence did not provide certainty that refinancing would occur by the requested date, within any further 21-day period, or at all; there was no material from prospective lenders, the broker's communications did not show a final commitment or that payout figures were preventing loan documents, the debt had been outstanding for almost eighteen months, previous opportunities to refinance had failed, and further delay would prejudice the plaintiffs' ability to remove goods and market the land.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Seeking Stay of Enforcement Actions, Including Execution of a Writ of Possession / Defendants' Third Application for a Stay After Judgment for Possession and Monetary Judgment
Outcome
Defendants' notice of motion dated 17 December 2018 dismissed.
Legal Topics
['possession of Land' 'writ of Possession' 'stay of Execution' 'mortgage Default' 'refinancing']
['real Property' 'civil Procedure'] ['possession of Land' 'writ of Possession' 'stay of Execution' 'mortgage Default' 'refinancing']

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 Seeking Stay of Enforcement Actions, Including Execution of a Writ of Possession / Defendants' Third Application for a Stay After Judgment for Possession and Monetary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether enforcement actions should be stayed to allow the defendants further time to refinance the debt.' "Whether the defendants' material provided sufficient certainty that refinance would occur by 22 December 2018, within 21 days, or at all." 'Whether further delay would prejudice the plaintiffs by delaying removal of goods and marketing of the land.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because the defendants' evidence did not provide certainty that refinancing would occur by the requested date, within any further 21-day period, or at all; there was no material from prospective lenders, the broker's communications did not show a final commitment or that payout figures were preventing loan documents, the debt had been outstanding for almost eighteen months, previous opportunities to refinance had failed, and further delay would prejudice the plaintiffs' ability to remove goods and market the land.

Court Disposition

Defendants' notice of motion dated 17 December 2018 dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Defendants' notice of motion dated 17 December 2018 dismissed." "Defendants to pay Plaintiffs' costs of the motion."]