The court considered an application by a spouse relating to whether her matrimonial home could be used as security for a loan to a company. Her husband was an authorised director of the company and authorised the use of the home. The court held that a party must prove they have a prima facie case before a court will entertain their case. The court held that a party bears the burden to prove they have a valid cause of action or prima facie case by adducing evidence to support the claim. The evidence must be relevant and precise rather than vague and unrelated. Lastly, the court emphasised that litigation must be brought in good faith and not in a manner calculated to defeat the ends of justice.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the application and held that the house could be used as security.