Guijar v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited; Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Guijar

Gadens Lawyers (representing ANZ Banking Group) File Number(s): 2009/296795 Decision under appeal Citation: Guijar v ANZ Banking Group [2011] NSWSC 111 Date of Decision: 2011-03-03 00:00:00 Before: Harrison AsJ File Number(s): 2009/296795

Judgment 1CAMPBELL JA : Nature of the Case 2On 3 March 2011 the primary judge delivered judgment on an appeal brought to the Supreme Court from a decision in the Local Court: Guijar v ANZ Banking Group [2011] NSWSC 111. Both parties to these proceedings seek leave to appeal from her Honour's decision. In those circumstances, it is necessary to refer to the parties by name, rather than by reference to the roles they play in the proceedings in this court. 3One of the applications for leave to appeal is brought by Mr Arturo Guijar. The other is brought by Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (" the Bank "). 4In the Local Court proceedings, Mr Guijar sued the Bank for damages of the order of $33,500 that he alleged he had sustained as a result of the Bank breaching two agreements with him, each of which related to a loan that he obtained from the Bank. He put his case in the alternative as one of the Bank making misrepresentations to him concerning the loan, but that aspect of the case is no longer pursued. The Right of Appeal from the Local Court 5The Magistrate's decision in the present case was given in the General Division of the Local Court. Section 39(1) Local Court Act 2007 provides: "A party to proceedings before the Court sitting in its General Division who is dissatisfied with a judgment or order of the Court may appeal to the Supreme Court, but only on a question of law." 6Section 41(1) Local Court Act provides, so far as is relevant: "The Supreme Court may determine an appeal made under section 39(1) or 40: (a) by varying the terms of the judgment or order, or (b) by setting aside the judgment or order, or (c) by setting aside the judgment or order and remitting the matter to the Local Court for determination in accordance with the Supreme Court's directions, or (d) by dismissing the appeal." Uncontroversial Facts 7There are some uncontroversial facts. Mr Guijar was an investor in real estate. As at August 2003, the property he owned included: