This case concerned an objection by a Mortgagee in proceedings issued by the Bank seeking possession and sale against the Plaintiff Mortagee. The Plaintiff sought a strike-out application for the following reasons: first that the Second Defendant obtained a possession order in the action by fraudulent means; second the Bank obtained the possession order fraudulently; third the possession order was unenforceable because it failed to specify a date of compliance; and lastly the Writ of Possession and all steps taken to enforce it were unlawful and a nullity by virtue of the failure to specify a date of compliance. Further, the Plaintiff issued a Summons for interim relief to restrain the Bank from exercising its rights of possession pursuant to the possession order.
To continue reading full articles in PDF format:
L Junos -v- HSBC & K Taylor  SC (Bda) 33 Civ (29 June 2012)