Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Huybers and anor [2014] NSWSC 720

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Huybers and anor [2014] NSWSC 720

The applicant failed to demonstrate an arguable case of fraud or knowing participation by the respondent in any fraud perpetrated by Pineview, nor was the delay in bringing the application satisfactorily explained. Consequently, the application for a stay of execution must be dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited; First Defendant: Susan Elizabeth Huybers; Second Defendant: Green Global Constructions Pty Limited; Third Defendant: Pineview Property Holdings Pty Limited; Applicant: Biagina Rubino
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Execution of Writs of Possession / Interlocutory Proceeding; Notice of Motion
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Writs of Possession, Fraud Allegation, Delay in Application, Requirements for Arguable Case
Practice and Procedure Stay of Execution Writs of Possession Fraud Allegation Delay in Application Requirements for Arguable Case

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited

Plaintiff/respondent

Susan Elizabeth Huybers

First Defendant

Green Global Constructions Pty Limited

Second Defendant

Pineview Property Holdings Pty Limited

Third Defendant

Biagina Rubino

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Execution of Writs of Possession / Interlocutory Proceeding; Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has an arguable case of fraud against the respondent
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence to establish knowledge or participation in fraud by the respondent
  3. 3 Whether delay in making the application was adequately explained

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate an arguable case of fraud or knowing participation by the respondent in any fraud perpetrated by Pineview, nor was the delay in bringing the application satisfactorily explained. Consequently, the application for a stay of execution must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's notice of motion is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs.