Australia, June 2 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 2:

1. Before the Court for determination are two Notices of Motion. One filed by the defendants on 20 January 2025 seeks, in substance, orders under Part 12.11 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) that either the plaintiff's originating process be set aside or a declaration be made that the Court has no jurisdiction or, in the further alternative, that the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction in the proceedings. The submissions on that motion have been focused on the Court granting a stay. The second Notice of Motion was filed by the plaintiff on 28 March 2025 and seeks summary judgment in the proceedings.

2. The Motions have been listed for hearing together. Submissions have been provided in relation to the defendants' Notice of Motion. The Court has been greatly assisted by the written submissions which have been filed by counsel for the parties.

3. The background to the matter in relation to both motions is set out in the following affidavits:

a) For the defendants, the affidavits of:

i) Nicole Muscat dated 20 January 2025;

ii) Katherine Theresa McLennan dated 27 March 2025; and

iii) Samuel Barber of 9 April 2025;

b) For the plaintiff, the affidavits of Kailum Dennis Latimer-Micek dated 28 March 2025 and 1 May 2025.

4. The materials in evidence establish to my satisfaction that proceedings were commenced by the plaintiff in this Court on 30 October 2024 seeking judgment in various amounts against the three defendants. The matter arises out of loan agreements entered into by the plaintiff, which is a financier, with Sanwyn Pty Ltd (in Liq) ("Sanwyn") relating to the funding of the purchase by Sanwyn of certain equipment which appears to be haulage type equipment. The agreements entered into relate to three separate amounts funded, and repayments were made by Sanwyn to the plaintiff under the agreements.

5. However, a liquidator was appointed to Sanwyn on 3 July 2024 and, at various dates, the plaintiff terminated each of the agreements with Sanwyn. The defendants were guarantors under the agreements although the third defendant was only a guarantor under the third agreement.

6. In the material relied upon and annexed to the affidavits are the various security agreements entered. Various matters should be noted in relation to the agreements as follows:

a) Sanwyn had its registered office in Queensland;

b) Sanwyn conducted its operations in Queensland;

c) Each of the guarantors is and was at all material times located in Queensland;

d) The plaintiff has its registered office in New South Wales;

e) The plaintiff conducts its business from New South Wales;

f) The plaintiff advanced and received moneys in New South Wales;

g) Each of the agreements makes clear that the goods financed were to be used only in the customer's general business operations which operations were based in Queensland.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/196fc12ac6f8ecf3793ffa30)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.