Sama Zaraah Pty Ltd v 888 Projects Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 1041
The caveat claimed an interest in prospective lots in an unregistered proposed subdivision. Because any proprietary interest would arise only when it attached to an identifiable lot, the caveat was bad in substance. The defect was not a mere defect of form and was not saved by Real Property Act 1900 s 74L, so the summons to extend the caveat was dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 31 August 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Extend the Operation of a Caveat / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons
- Outcome
- Application dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['caveats Against Dealing' 'proprietary Interest in Proposed Subdivision Lots' 'real Property Act 1900 S 74 L' 'defects of Form and Substance']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application to Extend the Operation of a Caveat / Ex Tempore Judgment on Summons
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the plaintiff had a proprietary interest capable of supporting a caveat over prospective lots in a proposed subdivision where the plan of subdivision had not been registered.' 'Whether Real Property Act 1900 s 74L required the court to disregard the defect in the caveat.']
Ratio Decidendi
The caveat claimed an interest in prospective lots in an unregistered proposed subdivision. Because any proprietary interest would arise only when it attached to an identifiable lot, the caveat was bad in substance. The defect was not a mere defect of form and was not saved by Real Property Act 1900 s 74L, so the summons to extend the caveat was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['The summons is dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs."]
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