Australia & New Zealand Banking Group, Re [1995] QSC 335

Z67-2o S" c. 7.S-/_?.Js- State Reporting Bureau TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS (Copyright in this transcript is vested in the Crown. Copies thereof must not be made or sold without the written authority of the Director, State Reporting ~ureau.) REVISED COPIES ISSUED State Reporting Bureau Date ) / / / ~ SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CIVIL JURISDICTION WILLIAMS J OS No 769 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522). 1 // / OS No 770 of 1994 1/ ../ ., ./ J l ;V' 1,v ' / ,/J/ . IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 (Ll :., , /4,,..J: ., ,1 1 1c,.11 )1J. ✓ r') : 1· iv. , and /jV' .rJI IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 771 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) 1 4th Floor, The Law Courts, George Street. Brisbane. Q. 4000 Telephone: (07) 227 4360. Facsimile: (07) 227 5532 -- 1 of 5 -- OS No 772 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 773 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 777 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 778 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 779 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) 2 10 J .·1 . t 20 30 50 60 -- 2 of 5 -- OS No 780 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 781 of 1994 IN THE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 and IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) OS No 785 of 1994 I~)l];'HE MATTER OF THE CREDIT ACT 1987 an~ IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ACN 005 357 522) BRISBANE .. DATE 21/12/95 JUDGMENT 3 10 20 30 40 50 60 -- 3 of 5 -- 211295 D.1 Turn 2 ck (Williams J) HIS HONOUR: I have prepared reasons for judgment in this matter, which I publish. I propose in original summons 769, 770, 771, 772, 773, 777, 778, 779, 780, 781, and 785 making a declaration that the minor error could reasonably be excused and a further declaration that the debtors under all regulated contracts, which are affected by this minor error, are liable to pay the whole of the credit charges under those contracts. 10 20 HIS HONOUR: In the principal reasons for judgment, which I published this morning, I was critical of the procedure fol•ldwed with respect to these matters. That is, the procedure fol lowed seemed to 30 me to have had the result of increasing hearing time and the costs of the applications. It was really unnecessary to divide the Court's consideration of the matters relevant pursuant to section 87A of. the ... .__._.,. On the earlier occasion when I made a declaration in each of the applications now before me that minor errors pursuant to section 87A were involved, I made an order that the appl~cant bank pay the respondent Registrar's taxed costs of and incidental to the application. Following that, there was the further hearing before me on 11 October 1995 dealing with the issues whether the minor error involved in each application ought reasonably be excused and whether there ought to be a further declaration that the debtors under the regulated contracts in question were liable to pay the whole of the credit charges under those contracts. JUDGMENT 4 50 "'C -- 4 of 5 -- 211295 D.1 Turn 2 ck (Williams J) The second stage of the application was vigorously opposed by the Registrar. The Registrar gave notice requiring at least three of the applicant's deponents, who ordinarily resided in Melbourne, to be present for cross-examination, but that requirement was abandoned on the morning of the further hearing. It seems to me that additional costs were incurred by the applicant in consequence of that and that is a matter which, in my view, is relevant when one is determining the appropriate order for costs at this stage. The further proceedings were largely adversarial in nature and it is true that the applicant won on all points. However, the presence of the Registrar did facilitate the final determination of the issues and, certainly, in cases like this, the presence of the Registrar before the Court is desirable. Bearing in mind all that I have said,and taking into account in particular the fact the Registrar has an order for costs with respect to the first stage of the hearing of the applications, I am of the view that the appropriate order to make on each of the relevant applications with respect to the hearing on 11 October 1995 is as follows: on each application order that the applicant pay one half of the respondent Registrar's taxed costs of and incidental to the further hearing on 11 October 1995. JUDGMENT 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 -- 5 of 5 --