ASB BANK LIMITED V PROPDOC LIMITED HC HAM CIV-2011-488-56

ASB BANK LIMITED V PROPDOC LIMITED HC HAM CIV-2011-488-56

The Court granted leave to amend the statement of claim because the three-part test (interests of justice, no significant prejudice, no significant delay) was satisfied; entered summary judgment for part of the claim against the first defendant for $450,000 because the director conceded no opposition; and adjourned the summary judgment application against the second and third defendants with a timetable for filing amended defences and affidavits to ensure fair opportunity to be heard.

Citation
openlaw-101c6af0_4468_4d86_95d9_646ea2816b5c.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: ASB Bank Limited; First Defendant: PropDoc Limited; Second Defendant: Christopher John Robinson; Second Defendant: Alison Christina Robinson; Third Defendant: Killara Property Limited
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
22 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment / Application Hearing and Adjournment
Outcome
Partial summary judgment granted against first defendant for $450,000; leave to amend granted; summary judgment application against second and third defendants adjourned with detailed timetable; adjournment granted to first-named second defendant to obtain legal aid.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings, Mortgage/security Enforcement, Adjournment, Sale of Secured Property, Costs
Civil Banking and Finance Property Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Amendment of Pleadings Mortgage/security Enforcement Adjournment +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ASB Bank Limited

Plaintiff

PropDoc Limited

First Defendant

Christopher John Robinson

Second Defendant

Alison Christina Robinson

Second Defendant

Killara Property Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment / Application Hearing and Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant an adjournment to enable legal aid and fairness to defendants
  2. 2 Whether to allow amendment of statement of claim and verifying affidavit in summary judgment proceedings
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment can be entered for part of the claim against the first defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The Court granted leave to amend the statement of claim because the three-part test (interests of justice, no significant prejudice, no significant delay) was satisfied; entered summary judgment for part of the claim against the first defendant for $450,000 because the director conceded no opposition; and adjourned the summary judgment application against the second and third defendants with a timetable for filing amended defences and affidavits to ensure fair opportunity to be heard.

Court Disposition

Partial summary judgment granted against first defendant for $450,000; leave to amend granted; summary judgment application against second and third defendants adjourned with detailed timetable; adjournment granted to first-named second defendant to obtain legal aid.

Orders

  • Leave granted to file amended statement of claim and verifying affidavit
  • Judgment entered for part of the claim against the first defendant (PropDoc Limited) in the sum of $450,000