Australian Regional Credit v Rukavina [2010] NSWSC 1466

The borrower sought to stay of eviction in order to obtain advice as to setting aside judgment granted in 2002.

The borrower had a rather complex history of business dealings and borrowings. He had two companies which had been liquidated for failure to repay loans he had guaranteed. However, the borrower sought to argue that as he came from a non-English speaking back ground and had difficulty reading and understanding English he may have a defence. Justice Schmidt disagreed, finding that he was a business man who understood the nature of borrowings.

The borrower also failed on his claim that he would have a defence pursuant to the Consumer Credit Code. Justice Schmidt considered it was quite clear that the borrowings were for business purposes.

The Judge commented:

No matter how sympathetic one might be to the defendants’ difficult personal circumstances, that is not a basis for accepting such late and implausible claims as a basis for staying a default judgment which was not opposed in 2002 and has not been challenged since.

Click here to read the full judgment

Scroll to Top