Mackie.C. W. & Co., Ltd. v. Translanka Investments Ltd. – sllr 1995 volume 2 page 006

In the case between C. W. Mackie & Co., Ltd. and Translanka Investments Ltd., the court addressed the issue of whether the defendant’s unconditional leave to defend, premised on alleged non-compliance with statutory provisions such as Section 48 of the Bills of Exchange Ordinance and Section 25 of the Debt Recovery Act, constituted a sustainable defence. It was held that the defendant’s defence was a sham and lacked evidence of good faith, thus not meeting the evidentiary requirements for notice of dishonour or establishing a bona fide defence. The principle reaffirmed was that the mere assertion of legal technicalities, without substantive and genuine grounds, does not suffice to defeat the presumption in favour of the holder in due course under the Bills of Exchange Ordinance. The decisi