CBA v Munro [2011] NSWSC 128

The majority of the funds were used to discharge a previous loan to the wife. The balance was paid to the husband. The wife made a Contracts Review Act defence claiming she was:

  1. On a disability pension;
  2. Suffering from a mental disability;
  3. Inexperienced in financial matters;
  4. Of a lower than average intellect;
  5. Unable to understand any legal documents.

Justce R A  Hulme accepted that the wife was vulnerable to the influence of her husband. However, the bank was not on notice of that influence and the wife obtained the bulk of the benefit under the loan. Further, the wife consented to the advance to her husband.

Accordingly, the borrower was refused relief and the lender was granted judgment for possession.

Click here to read the full judgment

Scroll to Top