NAB v Convy [2007] NSWSC 1039

In this case the borrower went into default on 29 March 2005, the proceedings were commenced on 15 June 2006. The borrower was granted five stays of the writ of possession in a row. The borrower claimed to be refinancing but had $30,000 of other unpaid debts on her CRA and no evidence that any lender was prepared to lend. The borrower pointed to the fact that if evicted she and her two dogs would have nowhere else to go. The judge was moved by the borrower’s hardship and granted her a sixth stay – this time for five weeks – on the basis that it was likely that if a marketing campaign was commenced on the day the eviction expired the lender would recover all its debt. His Honour Justice Harrison felt that the strict rule in the High Court case of Inglis & Anor v The Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia (1972) 126 CLR 161, which would otherwise prevent such an order, ought to be “widened”.

Click here to read the full judgment

Scroll to Top