LONG v ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED SC 31/2012
The proposed appeal merely reargued points already carefully considered and rejected by the High Court and Court of Appeal; there is no issue of public or general importance nor any appearance of a miscarriage of justice, therefore leave to appeal is refused.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- LONG v ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED SC 31/2012
- Parties
- Applicant: Reginald Robert Long; Respondent: ANZ National Bank Limited
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 4 July 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- S176 Property Law Act 2007, Mortgagee's Duty to Obtain Best Price, Summary Judgment, Leave to Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Reginald Robert Long
Applicant
ANZ National Bank Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent complied with its duty under s176(1) Property Law Act 2007 to take reasonable care to obtain the best price at the time of the mortgagee sale
- 2 Whether the matter raised questions of public or general importance or a miscarriage of justice sufficient to grant leave to appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed appeal merely reargued points already carefully considered and rejected by the High Court and Court of Appeal; there is no issue of public or general importance nor any appearance of a miscarriage of justice, therefore leave to appeal is refused.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
- Costs reserved; respondent to file memorandum within seven days specifying costs sought and applicant to reply within a further seven days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
LONG v ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITED SC 31/2012 [4 July 2012]IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDSC 31/2012[2012] NZSC 51BETWEEN REGINALD ROBERT LONGApplicantAND ANZ NATIONAL BANK LIMITEDRespondentCourt: Elias CJ, McGrath and William Young JJCounsel: P A Craighead for ApplicantD D Watterson and O J Meech for RespondentJudgment: 4 July 2012JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.B Costs are reserved, with the respondent to submit a memorandum within seven days as to the costs sought and the applicant to reply within a further seven days.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] The applicant guaranteed the indebtedness of a related company to the respondent. This indebtedness was also secured by a mortgage over property. The property was sold by the respondent leaving a shortfall. In the High Court,1 the respondent obtained summary judgment against the applicant for this shortfall. His later challenge to this judgment was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.2 He now seeks leave to appeal. The point in issue is whether the respondent complied with its duty under s 176(1) of the Property Law Act 2007 to take reasonable care to obtain1 ANZ National Bank Ltd v Long HC Auckland CIV-2011-404-2741, 4 October 2011.2 Long v ANZ National Bank Ltd [2012] NZCA 132.the best price reasonably obtainable as at the time of the mortgagee sale of the property.[2] The proposed appeal does not raise any point of public or general importance. Instead the applicant seeks to revisit arguments which have been carefully and thoroughly investigated in both the High Court and Court of Appeal. We consider that the answers to those arguments given by both Courts are convincing and there is no appearance of a miscarriage of justice.[3] Accordingly the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.Solicitors:Webb Morice, Auckland for ApplicantMinter Ellison Rudd Watts, Auckland for Respondent