Ageist Pty Ltd v Lilly (Lila) Stojcevski [2021] NSWSC 1105
There is no utility in the caveat because the equity claimed by the Defendants cannot survive the payments due under the registered mortgages and there would be no surplus for their claim; there is no serious issue to be tried, the caveat is not bona fide, and the balance of convenience strongly favours removal to allow completion of sale.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 August 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Equity Application / Hearing and Orders on Application to Remove Caveat
- Outcome
- Caveat ordered to be removed
- Legal Topics
- ['caveats' 'removal of Caveat' 'equitable Interests' 'mortgage Priorities' 'balance of Convenience' 'bona Fides of Caveat']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Equity Application / Hearing and Orders on Application to Remove Caveat
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether there is a serious question to be tried supporting the caveat' 'Whether the balance of convenience favours removal of the caveat' 'Whether the caveat is bona fide' 'Whether the caveat has any utility given the priorities of registered mortgagees']
Ratio Decidendi
There is no utility in the caveat because the equity claimed by the Defendants cannot survive the payments due under the registered mortgages and there would be no surplus for their claim; there is no serious issue to be tried, the caveat is not bona fide, and the balance of convenience strongly favours removal to allow completion of sale.
Court Disposition
Caveat ordered to be removed
Orders
- ['The caveat AR295470 lodged by the Defendants is to be removed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment