6 Jun 2008
SCB was entitled to the costs of the consolidated actions but not to full costs because although SCB did not act improperly in advancing the misrepresentation cause, that cause materially increased preparation costs; a 15% reduction of SCB's recoverable costs is appropriate, resulting in SCB receiving 85% of the costs; no reduction was ordered for Requisition 7.
12 Sept 2006
Defendants' affidavits were found not reasonably capable of belief; documentary evidence (Receipt and Guarantee) established that the Borrowers received the loan and the defendants executed the Guarantee. Although the plaintiff breached particulars required by s.18(2), those breaches did not cause adverse consequences to the Borrowers or guarantors such as to make enforcement inequitable; the court therefore exercised its discretion under s.18(3) to hold the Agreement and Guarantee enforceable. There was no proven misrepresentation or undue influence. Accordingly, no triable issue existed and…
2 Jun 2006
No misrepresentation was proven: the recording, the parties' conduct and the Agreement show the transactions were forward contracts not options or swaps; the defendant defaulted and the plaintiff lawfully liquidated and covered under the Agreement and is entitled to recover the shortfall (US$386,938) with contractual interest and costs, and the counterclaim fails.