Bowkett v Action Finance Ltd: Difference between revisions
Removed {{Underlinked}} tag from article (TW) |
m Normalize {{Multiple issues}}: Remove {{Multiple issues}} for only 1 maintenance template(s): Refimprove |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Multiple issues| |
|||
{{Orphan|date=June 2015}} |
{{Orphan|date=June 2015}} |
||
{{Refimprove|date=October 2018}} |
{{Refimprove|date=October 2018}} |
||
}} |
|||
{{Infobox court case |
{{Infobox court case |
Revision as of 19:05, 31 May 2020
This article needs additional citations for verification. (October 2018) |
Bowkett v Action Finance Ltd | |
---|---|
Court | High Court of New Zealand |
Full case name | Bowkett v Action Finance Ltd |
Decided | 2 July 1991 |
Citation(s) | [1992] 1 NZLR 449 |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Tipping J |
Bowkett v Action Finance Ltd [1992] 1 NZLR 449 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding unconscionable bargains.[1][2]
Background
The Bowketts, an elderly couple, under pressure from their son Michael, agreed to use their house as security for a loan for their son with Action Finance. The Bowketts did not seek independent legal advice, but Action Finance's legal executive advised them to do so, as well as explaining the nature of the transaction.
When the son later defaulted on the loan, Action Finance sought to foreclose on the Bowketts' house. The Bowketts obtained an interim injunction to stop the sale, pleading unconscionable bargain.
Action Finance appealed to have the injunction lifted.
Held
The court refused to lift the injunction, as the Bowketts were under a special disability when they entered into the transaction.
References
- ^ Chetwin, Maree; Graw, Stephen; Tiong, Raymond (2006). An introduction to the Law of Contract in New Zealand (4th ed.). Thomson Brookers. p. [page needed]. ISBN 0-86472-555-8.
- ^ Gerbic, Philippa; Lawrence, Martin (2003). Understanding Commercial Law (5th ed.). LexisNexis. ISBN 0-408-71714-9.