Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Mortgage Code of Conduct does not apply where commercial investment later becomes primary residence
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court grants an order for an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant from trespass upon property, on the grounds that the defendant had drawn a loan to purchase the property as a residential investment, not as a primary home, and thus could not avail of the protections of the Mortgage Code of Conduct.
Interlocutory injunction sought to restrain trespass – Plaintiff received of Promontoria Finn – Plaintiff claims entitlement to the protection of the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears - Defendants claim the property to be their family home – Plaintiff claims it is not – Defendant not entitled to use Code of Conduct where she drew down a commercial mortgage for the purpose of purchasing a residential investment property – subsequently using that property as her residence irrelevant -in any event, was in breach of Clause 6 of the contract and thus the Mortgage Arrears Resolution Process does not apply – Defendant not denied monies due – damages would not be an adequate remedy for the Plaintiff where the Defendant cannot repay loan – Plaintiff has provided an undertaking as to damages – injunction granted
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
