Sandhurst Trustees Limited v Dabboussi [2022] NSWSC 754

Sandhurst Trustees Limited v Dabboussi [2022] NSWSC 754

The application to set aside default judgment was dismissed because the only defence with potential merit (a responsible lending claim) was considered weak and unlikely to affect entitlement to possession or the judgment debt. The applicant understood the process and chose not to contest the proceedings until much later, and delay was the result of forensic decision-making. The interests of justice, especially the considerable prejudice to the second defendant (Ms Bernard), weighed strongly against setting aside the judgment.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Sandhurst Trustees Limited; Second Plaintiff: MCCA Asset Management Ltd; First Defendant/applicant: Ahmad Dabboussi; Second Defendant: Fadile Moubayed Bernard
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Judgment for Possession
Outcome
Notice of motion to set aside default judgment dismissed; orders as to costs
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Possession of Property, Responsible Lending, Enforcement of Judgments, Costs
Civil Procedure Real Property Credit Law Setting Aside Default Judgment Possession of Property Responsible Lending Enforcement of Judgments Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sandhurst Trustees Limited

First Plaintiff

MCCA Asset Management Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Ahmad Dabboussi

First Defendant/applicant

Fadile Moubayed Bernard

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment and Judgment for Possession

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the default judgment and judgment for possession should be set aside
  2. 2 Whether a triable issue exists regarding responsible lending or other defences
  3. 3 Whether delay and prejudice bar the relief sought

Ratio Decidendi

The application to set aside default judgment was dismissed because the only defence with potential merit (a responsible lending claim) was considered weak and unlikely to affect entitlement to possession or the judgment debt. The applicant understood the process and chose not to contest the proceedings until much later, and delay was the result of forensic decision-making. The interests of justice, especially the considerable prejudice to the second defendant (Ms Bernard), weighed strongly against setting aside the judgment.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion to set aside default judgment dismissed; orders as to costs

Orders

  • The notice of motion filed 24 February 2022 is dismissed.
  • The first defendant is to pay the plaintiffs' and second defendant's costs of the motion.