4 Jan 2017
The court found abundant disputed material facts raising triable issues; therefore summary judgment was inappropriate. The Master's orders were set aside and the defendant was granted leave to defend on condition that he pays $1.9 million into court within 21 days.
4 Feb 2009
The summons seeking a stay or indefinite extension was dismissed because the Consent Order remains valid and binding until set aside, the petitioner did not apply to set aside the Consent Order, failed to explain delay or provide a finite timeframe, and had not shown entitlement to the relief sought; the interim stay was uplifted but a limited reasonable extension (two months) to comply with the undertaking was granted.
21 Apr 2004
The master's order of 3 September 2003 was regular under the adjournment provisions of Cap.62; the defendants failed to show any defence with a real prospect of success (oral assurances did not negate the existing mortgage obligations and alleged illegal structure did not relieve the duty to repay); accordingly the appeal to set aside the order is dismissed.
2 Mar 1998
Even if the debtor did not actually receive the 1995 papers, service was properly effected by attempts at multiple addresses and substituted service with advertisement; the debtor admitted indebtedness, had no meritorious defence and failed to take effective steps to pursue the proposed sale or otherwise avoid enforcement; the bank was entitled to enforce its security and refuse instalment repayment — therefore the application to set aside the order was dismissed.
15 Aug 1997
There were arguable disputes of fact and accounting and no established relevant mistake on the evidence; unilateral or solicitor-reliance mistakes were insufficient to set aside the Consent Orders, so summary relief was inappropriate and the appeal was dismissed.