CASHFACTOR LIMITED V CORMICK HC CHCH CIV-2011-409-002515

CASHFACTOR LIMITED V CORMICK HC CHCH CIV-2011-409-002515

The Court concluded there is no arguable defence to liability under the four factoring loans: the contracts and contemporaneous documents establish default and the guarantees bind the defendant; indulgent statements about a four month period did not vary the written terms. Therefore summary judgment is entered for...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
openlaw-48ab6468_5c44_4507_af64_6eae38ccee17.pdf
Parties
Plaintiff: Cashfactor Limited; Defendant: Judith Margaret Cormick
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
11 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Debt Recovery; Guarantee; Factoring / Summary Judgment Hearing (reserved Judgment)
Outcome
Summary judgment entered for plaintiff as to liability for four factoring loans; trial directed on quantum of those loans; no summary judgment as to liability or quantum on $80,000 Seed Loan; pleadings and case management directions issued; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Guarantee Liability, Factoring Agreements, Contract Interpretation, Quantum of Damages, Estoppel, Unconscionability
Contract Law Civil Procedure Secured Transactions Guarantee Law Summary Judgment Guarantee Liability Factoring Agreements Contract Interpretation +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cashfactor Limited

Plaintiff

Judith Margaret Cormick

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Debt Recovery; Guarantee; Factoring / Summary Judgment Hearing (reserved Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment appropriate
  2. 2 Whether defendant liable as guarantor for four factoring loans
  3. 3 Whether the $80,000 Seed Capital loan was repayable immediately or only after 12 months

Ratio Decidendi

The Court concluded there is no arguable defence to liability under the four factoring loans: the contracts and contemporaneous documents establish default and the guarantees bind the defendant; indulgent statements about a four month period did not vary the written terms. Therefore summary judgment is entered for liability on those four loans. The separate $80,000 Seed Loan is at least arguably a 12 month loan and raises a triable issue as to liability and quantum, so no summary judgment is granted on that loan.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment entered for plaintiff as to liability for four factoring loans; trial directed on quantum of those loans; no summary judgment as to liability or quantum on $80,000 Seed Loan; pleadings and case management directions issued; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for plaintiff as to liability for the four factoring loans dated 23 July, 1 August, 22 August and 14 September 2011
  • No summary judgment entered as to liability or quantum in respect of the Synflex $80,000 Seed Capital Loan; trial to determine both liability and quantum on that claim