Smith v Smith [2016] NSWSC 1287
There is a serious question to be tried concerning the wife's caveatable interest in the property, and the balance of convenience favours the extension of the caveat pending resolution of family law proceedings.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Sharee Smith; Defendant: Rodney William Smith
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 September 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Proceedings to Extend Caveat and Related Relief / Ex Tempore Judgment Following Urgent Application
- Outcome
- Caveat extended; proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia.
- Legal Topics
- Caveats, Matrimonial Property, Extension of Caveat, Transfer of Proceedings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sharee Smith
Plaintiff
Rodney William Smith
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Proceedings to Extend Caveat and Related Relief / Ex Tempore Judgment Following Urgent Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the caveat lodged by the wife over the matrimonial home should be extended under s 74K Real Property Act 1900 (NSW)
- 2 Whether there is a serious question to be tried that the wife has a caveatable interest
- 3 Balance of convenience regarding extension of the caveat
Ratio Decidendi
There is a serious question to be tried concerning the wife's caveatable interest in the property, and the balance of convenience favours the extension of the caveat pending resolution of family law proceedings.
Court Disposition
Caveat extended; proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia.
Orders
- Upon the plaintiff giving to the Court the usual undertaking as to damages, order pursuant to s 74K of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) extending caveat number AK 644358 until further order.
- Proceedings transferred to the Family Court of Australia.
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