Markovsky v Teplitsky [2022] NSWCA 228

Markovsky v Teplitsky [2022] NSWCA 228

The Deed did not indicate any intent to create the charges or estate in fee simple claimed in the caveats, the applicant did not identify any reasonable basis for the existence of those claimed interests, and no alternative arguable proprietary interest was suggested; accordingly there was no proper basis to extend the operation of the caveats.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend Operation of Caveats Under S 74 K of the Real Property Act 1900 (nsw) / Notice of Motion in the Court of Appeal Pending Appeal From the Equity Division
Outcome
Notice of motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['caveats' 'extension of Caveats' 'proprietary Interests' 'deed Construction' 'appeal']
['real Property' 'civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['caveats' 'extension of Caveats' 'proprietary Interests' 'deed Construction' 'appeal']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Extend Operation of Caveats Under S 74 K of the Real Property Act 1900 (nsw) / Notice of Motion in the Court of Appeal Pending Appeal From the Equity Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the operation of four caveats should be extended under s 74K of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW).' 'Whether there was a reasonable basis for the existence of the interests claimed in the caveats arising out of the Deed.' 'Whether the applicant identified any alternative arguable proprietary interest supporting fresh caveats.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Deed did not indicate any intent to create the charges or estate in fee simple claimed in the caveats, the applicant did not identify any reasonable basis for the existence of those claimed interests, and no alternative arguable proprietary interest was suggested; accordingly there was no proper basis to extend the operation of the caveats.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Dismiss Ms Markovsky's notice of motion filed on 27 October 2022, with costs."]