Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 DECEMBER 2016

Supreme Court summarily dismisses promissory note defences and claims

The Court had power to summarily dismiss proceedings where those proceedings were vexatious or an abuse of process.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Summary

Mr and Mrs Evans alleged that they had repaid a debt owed by them to ANZ by way of a Promissory Note. Mr and Mrs Evans further alleged that as ANZ failed to accept the Promissory Note, ANZ owed them more than $7,000,000.

In determining this case (Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd v Evans; Evans v Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd [2016] NSWSC 1742), the Supreme Court of New South Wales has provided further guidance on the issue of when it is appropriate to strike out or summarily dismiss a pleading and confirmed that a party cannot unilaterally impose a contract upon another party.

Kemp Strang acted on behalf of ANZ in this matter, which was heard by his Honour, Justice Garling on 21 September 2016 with judgment being delivered on 9 December 2016.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from