Konings v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [No 2]

[2016] WASCA 178

KONINGS -v- COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA [No 2] [2016] WASCA 178

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2016] WASCA 178
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)	Published:	14/10/2016
Case No:	CACV:24/2016	Heard:	3 OCTOBER 2016
Coram:	NEWNES JA MURPHY JA	Delivered:	3/10/16
No of pages:	3	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	JAN LAURENS KONINGS JULIE KONINGS COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA
Catchwords:	Practice and procedure Whether grounds of appeal have reasonable prospect of success Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Nil
Case References:	Konings v The Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2016] WASCA 122

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : KONINGS -v- COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA [No 2] [2016] WASCA 178 CORAM : NEWNES JA

MURPHY JA

HEARD : 3 OCTOBER 2016 DELIVERED : 3 OCTOBER 2016 PUBLISHED : 14 OCTOBER 2016 FILE NO/S : CACV 24 of 2016 BETWEEN : JAN LAURENS KONINGS

JULIE KONINGS
Appellants

AND

COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : MASTER SANDERSON

File No : CIV 1627 of 2015

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - Whether grounds of appeal have reasonable prospect of success - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellants : In person
Respondent : Ms N Fraser

Solicitors:

Appellants : In person
Respondent : Gadens Lawyers

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Konings v The Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2016] WASCA 122

REASONS OF THE COURT:

(These reasons were delivered extemporaneously and have been edited from the transcript.)

1 This is an appeal from a decision of Master Sanderson, who ordered that summary judgment be entered for the respondent. The appellants were ordered to pay to the respondent the sum of $992,932.92 plus interest and to give vacant possession of a property secured by a mortgage to the respondent.

2 The appeal comes before the court on a registrar's notice to attend for the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed pursuant to rule 43(2)(g)(i) of the Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA) on the basis that none of the grounds of appeal has a reasonable prospect of succeeding.

3 The matter previously came before the court on the appellant's application for a stay of enforcement of the judgment. The court found, for reasons it explained, that none of the grounds of appeal had a reasonable prospect of succeeding and, accordingly, dismissed the application: Konings v The Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2016] WASCA 122. The grounds of appeal were set out in [9] of the reasons, but the court also dealt with two further matters raised by the appellants that were not contained in the grounds of appeal.

4 The grounds of appeal remain unchanged and there is nothing to suggest that there exists any basis upon which the appellants might successfully challenge the master's decision. It follows that the grounds of appeal have no reasonable prospect of succeeding and the appeal must be dismissed. There will be an order accordingly.