The Court refused an interlocutory injunction sought by a mortgagor to restrain a mortgagee in possession from selling properties below a stipulated reserve price or without the mortgagor's consent. Craig J held that while a serious question to be tried existed regarding unconscionability claims against the mortgagee (Salem King), it was not sufficiently strong to warrant relief given the balance of convenience: the plaintiffs could not pay the mortgage debt into court per the Inglis principle, no authority supported a court-imposed reserve price on a mortgagee sale (the mortgagee's existing duty to obtain the best price providing adequate protection), interest was accruing on unpaid debt with no prospect of payment, and the plaintiffs' undertaking as to damages was effectively worthless. The Court left open the question of whether more targeted interlocutory relief against the equitable mortgagee (NJ Capital) might be appropriate once a sale crystallised and any surplus was identified.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.