The consequences of signing as a witness to a forged signature

The court in Vella said:

1. On about 19 January 2006, a loan application in the name of Mr Vella was submitted to La Trobe on behalf of Permanent for loan advances.
2. On about 22 February 2006, Ms Palumbo affixed her signature as witness to two memoranda of mortgages which purported to grant mortgages by Mr Vella over those properties in favour of Permanent.
3. At the time she affixed her signature to those memoranda of mortgages she knew, or ought to have known, that Permanent was the mortgagee named in each mortgage.
4. In so affixing her signature, she represented to Permanent that the plaintiff was known to her and had affixed his signature to the mortgage in her presence.
5. She confirmed that representation to Permanent’s solicitor.
6. The representations were false.
7. Permanent relying on those representations advanced funds of $1,151,500.00 which were lost.
   There should be a verdict against Ms Palumbo for $1,151,50000 plus the appropriate amount of interest.