26 June 2014

The borrowers defaulted on three farm loans and the bank claimed possession. The borrowers admitted the bank's claim but argued the bank was estopped from seeking possession because of representations made by the bank at mediation that they would refinance the loans if an amount owing could be agreed upon.

The court found no defence to the claim and no basis for estoppel because the representations were conditional on the parties agreeing what amount was owing. The court also found that the bank had the benefit of a certificate that the Farm Debt Mediation Act did not apply to the mortgages because the mediation had failed.

The defences were struck out.

Click here to read the full judgment

LesawebLesa Bransgrove holds a Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Queensland and a Master of Laws from the University of London. Lesa was admitted as a solicitor of the Queensland Supreme Court in 1996 and the UK Supreme Court in 2002 and as a barrister of the NSW Bar in 2009. After working on the Lehman's litigation Lesa left the bar and joined Bransgroves.

Read more about Lesa Bransgrove