C & M Papapetros Pty Ltd v Patty Panayiotou [2011] NSWSC 1295
The caveat did not disclose a caveatable interest and, although it was voluntarily removed, its lodgment put the plaintiff to the necessity and costs of approaching the court; therefore the summons should be dismissed because the caveat had been removed, but the defendant should pay the plaintiff's costs.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 October 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Summons for Removal of a Caveat / Equity Division Duty List; Ex Tempore Decision After Caveat Voluntarily Removed
- Outcome
- Summons dismissed. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['caveats' 'caveatable Interest' 'removal of Caveat' 'costs of Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Summons for Removal of a Caveat / Equity Division Duty List; Ex Tempore Decision After Caveat Voluntarily Removed
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the summons should be dismissed after the defendant voluntarily removed the caveat.' "Whether the defendant should pay the plaintiff's costs where the caveat did not disclose a caveatable interest and the plaintiff incurred costs approaching the court."]
Ratio Decidendi
The caveat did not disclose a caveatable interest and, although it was voluntarily removed, its lodgment put the plaintiff to the necessity and costs of approaching the court; therefore the summons should be dismissed because the caveat had been removed, but the defendant should pay the plaintiff's costs.
Court Disposition
Summons dismissed. Defendant to pay plaintiff's costs.
Orders
- ['The summons be dismissed.' "The defendant pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings."]
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