Karliner v McCallum [2015] NSWDC 191

Karliner v McCallum [2015] NSWDC 191

The plaintiff was entitled to judgment against the second defendant pursuant to UCPR r 29.7(3) as the evidence established the existence and execution of the guarantee, the amount claimed was quantified and due, and no payments or credits had reduced the amount. The plea of non est factum failed as sufficient evidence showed execution by the second defendant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Verdict and Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant
Legal Topics
['judgment Against Absent Defendant' 'liquidated Claim' 'guarantee' 'convertible Note']
['civil Procedure'] ['judgment Against Absent Defendant' 'liquidated Claim' 'guarantee' 'convertible Note']

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 / Verdict and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second defendant executed the guarantee' 'Whether the plaintiff is entitled to judgment against the absent defendant under UCPR r 29.7(3)' 'Calculation of the sum payable under the convertible note']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was entitled to judgment against the second defendant pursuant to UCPR r 29.7(3) as the evidence established the existence and execution of the guarantee, the amount claimed was quantified and due, and no payments or credits had reduced the amount. The plea of non est factum failed as sufficient evidence showed execution by the second defendant.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the second defendant in the sum of $433,028.15']