Perpetual Limited v Moussa [2008] NSWSC 22
Despite unsatisfactory evidence as to the defendants’ capacity to refinance or repay, and limited evidence of hardship, the Court exercised its discretion to stay execution of the writ of possession solely on the basis of hardship, there being no evidence from the plaintiff of imminent danger to its security.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 January 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Mortgagee Action for Possession and Debt / Application for Stay of Execution of Writ of Possession
- Outcome
- Execution of the writ of possession stayed to 21 February 2008. Costs reserved.
- Legal Topics
- ['remedies of the Mortgagee' 'stay of Execution' 'hardship']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Mortgagee Action for Possession and Debt / Application for Stay of Execution of Writ of Possession
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether execution of the writ of possession should be stayed based on defendants’ hardship and refinance prospects']
Ratio Decidendi
Despite unsatisfactory evidence as to the defendants’ capacity to refinance or repay, and limited evidence of hardship, the Court exercised its discretion to stay execution of the writ of possession solely on the basis of hardship, there being no evidence from the plaintiff of imminent danger to its security.
Court Disposition
Execution of the writ of possession stayed to 21 February 2008. Costs reserved.
Orders
- ['Execution of the writ of possession granted on 10 January 2008 is stayed until and including 21 February 2008.' 'Costs of the notice of motion are reserved.' 'Parties to cooperate to enable plaintiff to obtain property valuation if desired.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment