{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f37\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f38\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f40\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f41\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f42\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f43\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f44\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f45\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\* \ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tblind0\tblindtype3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\wrapdefault\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}} {\*\rsidtbl \rsid5730401\rsid6641209\rsid8730219\rsid11468904\rsid11930137}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6829;}{\info{\title IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI}{\operator freriks_k}{\creatim\yr2008\mo12\dy4\hr14\min29}{\revtim\yr2009\mo1\dy21\hr9\min59} {\version5}{\edmins8}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2865}{\nofchars16332}{\nofcharsws19159}{\vern16393}{\*\password 00000000}}{\*\xmlnstbl }\paperw12240\paperh15840\margl2160\margr1728\margt1152\margb720\gutter0 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\grfdocevents0\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot11930137 \fet0{\*\wgrffmtfilter 013f}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1152\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid11930137\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2 \pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6 \pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 \par }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 AT LAUTOKA \par CIVIL JURISDICTION \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904\charrsid11468904 CIVIL }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 ACTION NO. HBC 0177 OF 2001L \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 BETWEEN:}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 FERETARIKI TORA}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par Plaintiff \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904\charrsid11468904 AND: \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6641209 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND \par BANKING GROUP LIMITED \par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Defendant \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par Mr. M.K. Sahu Khan for the Plaintiff \par Mr. Ronald Gordon for the Defendant \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid6641209 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Date of Hearing: 16 August 2001 \par Date of Decision: 11 October 2002 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 DEC}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 I}{ \b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 SIO}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 N}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par The Plaintiff seeks to restrain the Defendant bank from exercising its powers of sale under the mortgage it holds over the Plaintiff\rquote s property.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Because of the circumstances of this case the Plaintiff alleges such a step would be inequitable, oppressive and unconscionable.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In reply the Defendant argues that the Plaintiff has been in frequent default with its payments, and when repayment in full was promised using the Plaintiff\rquote s FNPF funds, only partial payment was in fact made.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The bank claims it is therefore entitled to proceed to enforce its rights. \par \par The Plaintiff filed a writ on 25 June 2001 together with an inter partes summons of the same date.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The summons sought an injunction: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93That the defendant and/or its servants and/or agents and/or solicitors be restrained from exercising its powers of sale under the Mortgage number 287003 over the land known as Valele (Part of) Lot 1, DP 4260 in the Island of Vitilevu and the District of Ba and having an area of 1 rood and 1.7 perches contained and comprised in Certificate of Title No. 17400.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par Two affidavits were filed for the Plaintiff and two for the Defendant.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 A Defence was filed on 12 July 2001. \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8730219 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Evidence}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par The Plaintiff used to work for the Defendant bank.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He did so for 20 years.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He has a freehold property at Yalalevu, Ba of which he is the registered owner.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In 1990 he executed a mortgage over the property in favour of the bank.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He was required}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 to make repayments of $320 per month. \par \par The Plaintiff retired from the bank because of ill health in January 1999.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 As a result the bank no longer extended its staff privileges on loans towards the Plaintiff.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 From 29.1.2000 the preferential staff interest rate no longer applied, and the Plaintiff was to pay the normal customer rate.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Similarly t he monthly repayment sum went up from $320 to $410 per month.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Plaintiff could not keep up his payments, and defaulted either by paying less than required in a month or by making no monthly repayment at all. \par \par In a letter of 7 December 1999, the Defendant wrote to the Plaintiff: \'93Your response to call into the bank for discussion remains long outstanding and the bank will now look at this matter critically.\'94}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 A Notice of Default letter was issued on 11 December 2000.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The letter informed the Plaintiff that his account was in arrears by $3,480 and referred to two previous letters.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 A schedule of arrears was provided.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He was told the penalty interest rate was being applied.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He was asked to rectify the situation.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He was warned if default were not rectified within 7 days, \'93 We will have no alternative but to enforce our rights under the security as abovementioned and issue you with required formal demand notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 You would appreciate the situation is not acceptable and you have had adequate time to correct the default.\'94 \par \par The Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the notice would mean that the bank\rquote s Asset Management Unit would commence legal proceedings.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The letter concluded with an invitation for him to contact one of 2 named persons at the bank to discuss the matter further, and he was}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 asked to give the matter his urgent attention. \par \par On 27 December 2000 the bank sent a further letter informing the Plaintiff that the account was being put under the control of the Nadi Asset Management Unit because of the large arrears situation.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Again he was asked to give the matter his urgent attention. \par \par The Plaintiff says that sometime in November 2000 he called upon and informed Bharat Kumar, the bank\rquote s Asset Management Officer at Nadi that \'93he had already applied to the FNPF for the transfer of funds and which is to be applied towards the mortgage debt to which he agreed\'94.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In his affidavit in opposition of 11 July 2001, Bharat Kumar says he only spoke to the Plaintiff in January 2001, not November.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In view of the bank\rquote s letter of 27 December 2000, Mr. Kumar\rquote s account would appear more likely.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Similarly no evidence has been presented by the Plaintiff of any correspondence with FNPF in November 2000, only a letter from FNPF of 15 February 2001 acknowledging the Plaintiff\rquote s loan application for which the letter fails to provide a date.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 But it is likely to have been sent in February 2001. \par \par On 19 April 2001 the bank\rquote s lawyers issued and served on the Plaintiff a Default Notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The notice was set out in a tabulated and easy to read form.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Two paragraphs were significant: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Action necessary to remedy the default \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 To remedy the default you must pay an amount of $4,610.00 within (30) days from the date of service of this notice on you together with the costs of this notice as indicated hereunder. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Failure to remedy the default}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 If you cannot remedy the default then all of the monies owed under the abovementioned accounts will become immediately due and payable by you.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 However, we recommend that if you cannot pay contact us to discuss the alternative arrangements.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par There was no evidence that the Plaintiff took up this offer and contacted the bank\rquote s officers.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 On 30 April 2001 the Plaintiff owed the Defendant $35,743.71.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 He made a }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 cash repayment of $410 on 11 May 2001.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The only other payment he had made up till then for the year 2001 was of $100 on 6 March 2001. \par \par On 21st}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 May 2001 the Defendant received an FNPF cheque for $20,480.00 sent by FNPF to the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 This left a balance on the housing loan account in May 2001 of $14,853.71.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Plaintiff deposes to the value of the property being approximately $100,000 though no professional valuation was exhibited in support.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 } {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Plaintiff\rquote s estimate was disputed by the Defendant.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 No alternative value range was put forward. \par \par The Defendant says the time given in the Default Notice for remedying the default was not complied with, and so all of the monies owing then became due.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In addition, April\rquote s payment after the Service of the Default Notice was not paid, though the Plaintiff did make the payment for May.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Defendant\rquote s solicitor issued another letter on 26 May 2001 pointing out these matters, stating the $20,480 had been received without prejudice to the bank\rquote s \'93 right to exercise mortgagee sale as the said payment was received after the due date of the Default Notice\'94.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The letter required therefore full payment of the remaining balance owing forthwith. \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8730219 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Default Notice}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par To his second affidavit the Plaintiff exhibits a letter from FNPF to the Defendant\rquote s Marks Street Branch enclosing the FNPF cheque for $20,480.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 This letter is dated (overwritten in hand) 16 May 2001.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The exhibit seems to be an office copy from the FNPF file.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It is indorsed in hand at the bottom right hand corner \'93cheque sent by Fast post 17/05/01", and the indorsement is signed and dated the same date.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 For an unexplained reason, the letter arrived only on 21.5.01; the cheque was deposited and receipted the next day on 22.5.01.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Mr. Kumar for the bank said the normal procedure was for non-bank cheques to be processed in that way, i.e. credit given on day after receipt. \par \par The final day of the 30 days allowed, from date of service of the Default Notice [19 April 2001] to the date by which remedy of the default was required was 18 May 2001, a Friday.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The bank received the FNPF cheque from FNPF on the following Monday, 21st May 2001.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Defendant was correct in arguing that there was a failure by the Plaintiff to comply strictly with the terms of the Default Notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He was a day late.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 I shall return to this issue further on. \par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 \par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Plaintiff complains that the Default Notice was not signed by the mortgagee itself.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Mr. Sahu Khan referred to Section 77 of the Property Law Act, which states: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Mortgagor in default}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 If default is made in payment of t he mortgage money or any part thereof, or in the performance or observance of any covenant expressed in any mortgage or in this Act declared to be implied in any mortgage, and such default is continued for one month or for such other period of time as in such mortgage for that purpose expressly fixed, the mortgagee may serve on the mortgagor notice in writing to pay the mortgage money or to perform and observe the covenants therein expressed or implied, as the case may be. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par There is nothing in the section confining the power to serve notices, to a personal power accorded to the mortgagee solely.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Notices can be signed and served by the mortgagee himself, or by his agents or by his solicitors. \par \par A similar argument was raised before me in a winding up case, }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In the Matter of Kim Industries Ltd}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 (unreported) Lautoka High Court civil Action HBF0036 of 1999L; 7 July 2000.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The full reasoning is set out between pp 5-9 of the ruling.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Section 221 (a) of the Companies Act had referred to a creditor making \'93a demand under his hand\'94.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It was argued the petitioning creditor company should have signed through its company secretary, a director, or other principal officer of the company, and not by the petitioner\rquote s solicitor. \par \par At page 6 of the judgment I had said: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93There is no prescribed form under the Rules for framing the Section 221 Notice.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The issuance of the notice is a preparatory step taken prior to the filing of a petition.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Notice is not a Court form. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Creditor, or someone with his authority, would ap pear to be the persons contemplated as being able to sign and to issue such a notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The common law rule was \'93}{ \i\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 qui per alium facit, per seipsum facere videtur\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 [He who does anything by another is deemed to have done it himself].}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Quain J in }{ \b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Re Whitley Partners Ltd [1886] 32 Ch.D 337 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 at}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 340 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 said: \'93We ought not to restrict the Common Law Rule,......, unless the statute makes a personal signature indispensable.\'94}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Here Section 221 does not insist on a personal signature.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par And at pages 8-9: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93No papers were filed authorising the solicitors for the petitioner to issue a demand notice.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 However, this was not necessary.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Indeed a solicitors authority cannot be disputed at trial.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In re New Zealand Gum Machines }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 (supra) at 95 where the proper course for such challenge was indicated to be a motion for stay. \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Re Whitley Partners Limited } {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 (supra) at 339 in interpreting the meaning of \'93shall be signed by each subscriber in the presence of and attested by one witness at least.\'94}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Cotton LJ had this to say: \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93The appellant conte nds that as nothing is said in the statute about signature by an agent, these expressions must mean that the signature is to be affixed by the subscriber himself... I think it would be wrong to hold that an enactment simply referring to signature is not s atisfied by signature by means of an agent.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par In }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Bateman Television Ltd. & Anor. v Coleridge Finance Co. Ltd. }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 [1969] NZLR 794 at 819 Macarthy J said: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93If I had any doubt, which I have not, I would lean strongly in favour of the efficacy of an agent \rquote s signature.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The practical advantages of that view of the situation are obvious and in a procedural matter such as this are entitled to weight.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 I conclude therefore that no procedural advantage attaches to a narrow legalistic approach to the signing of the Demand Notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Common sense also dictates that it should be open for the notice to be signed either by the Creditor himself or by his authorised agent, and a creditor could make his Barrister and Solicitor his authorised agent for such purposes.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 After all a company has to appear at court by a barrister and a solicitor.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 If a barrister and a solicitor can properly sign a Notice of Appeal for a company it follows that there could be nothing improper in a barrister and solicitor signing a Section 221 Notice, if so authorised.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Solicitors should ensure that they hold such authority.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par There appear to be no prescribed forms either for demands to be made under the Consumer Credit Act 1999.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Section 174 (1) of that Act provides: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904\charrsid11468904 \'93It}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 is sufficient compliance with a requirement under this Act for a document to be signed by a person if the person\rquote s signature is written on the document by another person by or under the authority of the person required to sign.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par I am satisfied for the purposes of this ruling that the issuance of the notice by the Defendant\rquote s solicitors was authorised, as was its service.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 All other issues in connection with the Notice can be raised at the trial. \par }{\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8730219 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Authorisation for making affidavits}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par Mr. Sahu Khan complains that Mr. Kumar failed to exhibit an authorisation showing that he was duly authorised by the Defendant to make his two affidavits on behalf of the Defendant. \par \par Solicitors would do well to maintain on file written authorisation from their litigant client for a witness}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 to depose to affidavits on behalf of the}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 litigant, whether that litigant be an individual person or a corporation.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 This practice may be of importance where there is conflict within a litigant\rquote s own ranks, such as where shareholders and directors fight within a company.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Oral authorisation is sufficient in}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 straightforward cases.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 As long as there is authorisation, and it is stated in the body of the affidavit to have been given, there is no necessity for it be exhibited. \par \par In }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Chirgwin v Russell & Anor. [1910] 27 TLR 21}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Vaughan Williams LJ said: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93 He hoped it would not be supposed that as a matter of practice, when an affidavit was made in support of a summons under Order XIV by a person other than the plaintiff, it was not necessary to show t hat the person making the affidavit was duly authorized to make it and further what means he had of knowing the facts he deposed to.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par In }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Ba Town Council v Fiji Broadcasting Commission & Others [1976] 22 Fiji LR 91}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 at pp 93-94 Kermode J said: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93None of the affidavits indicate that the Town Clerk was authorised by the plaintiff to make the affidavit.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par A similar point was picked up by the Court of Appeal in }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 John Alexander Bish v Bish Limited}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 (unreported) Fiji Court of Appeal Civil App. No. 68 of 1984; 22 March 1985 pp 6-7.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In all of these cases there had been a failure of the deponent to express the fact of authorisation by}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 the litigant for him}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 to depose in the affidavit on the litigant\rquote s behalf.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The better practice would see a deponent referring to such authorisation to depose on each occasion when he swears to an affidavit, which would include a second affidavit}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 in the same proceedings. \par \par In straightforward cases, where challenge is not anticipated to that authorisation,}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 the authorisation need not be in writt en form nor exhibited with the affidavit.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 But the deponent needs to mention due authorisation in every affidavit he makes for a party. \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8730219 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Was there compliance with the Default Notice? \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Assuming that leeway could be given for a payment made a day late but in other respects in conformity with the remedial action required by the Default Notice, what would be the effect of such payment?}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Section 81 of the Consumer Credit Act provides for re-instatement of the mortgage \'93and any acceleration clause cannot operate\'94 if the other requirements of the section are met by the mortgagor \'93within the period specified in the notice\'94.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It would be an issue for the trial however}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 whether there had been \'93a subsequent breach of the same type\'94 [Section 81 (2)], which would prevent re-instatement. \par \par It is plain that for alleviation of the effects of default to be successful there must be compliance with the terms of the remedy as required in the Notice.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Once there has been a failure to comply by the mortgagor, even to the extent of being out by a single day of the time stipulated for remedial action, the decision to continue the mortgage contract apart from redemption remains with the bank.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It will make a commercial decision whether to permit continuance or whether to proceed to sell. \par \par I have not been informed of the bank\rquote s commercial reasons for calling in}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 the loan, bearing in mind the Plaintiff\rquote s special circumstances, other than that the bank intends to rely upon its legal rights.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It may be open to the Defendant to proceed along more than one avenue of enforcement under}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 the Property Law Act, [Sections 77, 78, 79] the Consumer Credit Act, and the mortgage document itself.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The Plaintiff has argued that it would be unconscionable for the bank to seek to enforce its powers of sale.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par \par There is an issue here as to whether the Plaintiff said he would remedy his defaults by repaying the entire remaining balance owing or whether he promised Mr. Kumar only a substantial repayment as was in fact made.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 It may be inferred the bank did not wish to continue with the mortgage arrangement because of the Plaintiff\rquote s history of defaults.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 But it held its hand thinking it was to be paid in full via the Plaintiff\rquote s FNPF funds.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 I do not consider unconscionability has been shown at this stage, nor do I consider there is a serious issue to be tried. \par \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8730219 {\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Power to restrain mortgagee sale}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par The position is summarised in Halsbury\rquote s Laws of England 3rd Edit. Vol. 27 at p 301: \par \par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \'93 The mortgagee will not be restrained from exercising his power of sale because the amount due is in dispute, or because the mortgagor has commenced a redemption action, or because the mortgagor objects to the manner in which the sale is being arranged.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 He will be restrained, however, if the mortgagor pays the amount claimed into court, that is, the amount which the mortgagee swears to be due to him, unless, on the terms of the mortgage, the claim is excessive.\'94 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par This passage was approved by Walsh J. who came to dismiss an application for an interim injunction in }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Inglis v Commonwealth Trading Bank of Australia [1971-72] 126 CLR 161 at p 164.}{ \b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The judge\rquote s decision was upheld subsequently by the Full Court. \par \par The necessity of paying into court the balance sum owed under the mortgage has few exceptions; one is where the debt itself for which the mortgage purports to be security is said not to have been incurred at all: }{ \b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Piggott v Williams (1821) 56 E.R. 1027}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 That is not the case here.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 In }{ \b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Rauzia Mohammed v ANZ [1984] 30 Fiji LR 136 at p 140}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Kermode J. said it would require \'93an exceptional case\'94 before a court would restrain a mortgagee from exercising a power of sale.}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 The power of sale being properly subject to challenge could be an exception: }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Westpac Banking Corporation v Adi Mahesh Prasad [1999] 45 Fiji LR at p 9}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 citing Sugerman J\rquote s judgment in }{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Harvey v McWatters (1948) 49 SR (NSW) 173}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 ; and the want of bona fides in the sale:}{\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Murad v National Provincial Bank (1966) 198 Estates Gazette 117}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 .}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 These exceptions do not apply here. \par \par If the bank proceeds to exercise its rights beyond the issuance of a demand notice, and its platform or prerequisite tackle is out of order at that time, it will be open for the Plaintiff to re-apply for an injunction to restrain the bank.}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 Meanwhile the Defendant is in a position to meet any subsequent award of damages, if claimed and ordered, in this or}{ \lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 }{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 a separate action. \par \par This application is declined with costs to the Defendant summarily assessed at $500. \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\b\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 A.H.C.T. GATES \par }{\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 J}{\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 UD}{\b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11468904 G}{ \b\ul\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 E}{\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\wrapdefault\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid11468904 {\lang2057\langfe1033\langnp2057\insrsid11930137\charrsid11468904 \par Solicitors for the Plaintiff: Messrs M.K. Sahu Khan & Co, Ba \par Solicitors for the Defendant: Messrs Gordon & Co, Lautoka \par }}