New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Caveat lapsing

Legal area

Court

22 May 2018

GUEST v WARNER [2018] NZHC 1165

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1165
Court

High Court

Because the parties agreed and it was appropriate for the proper administration of the Martin and Anne Guest Family Trust, the Court appointed Chris Darlow (or a trustee company to be incorporated by him and wholly controlled by him) as trustee, vested the specified land titles and trust funds in that trustee, ordered caveats to lapse, and authorised the trustee to charge and engage accountants and legal counsel with their costs met by the trust.
4 Dec 2015

LINDSAY v NOBLE INVESTMENTS LTD [2015] NZCA 588

Citation

[2015] NZCA 588
Court

Court of Appeal

The agreement's unqualified definition of "services" excluded stormwater and applied throughout the contract; no words or contemporaneous correspondence reasonably support a different meaning for the further subdivision, so it was not reasonably arguable that the vendor was contractually obliged to provide stormwater services to Lot 4 and the caveat could not be sustained in respect of stormwater services.
21 Oct 2015

DENG v LU [2015] NZHC 2585

Citation

[2015] NZHC 2585
Court

High Court

Leave was granted for the father to lodge a second caveat because evidence established a reasonably arguable case that a 19 March 2015 deed validly nominated/vested interest in the father and that the $160,000 pre-payment coupled with the pre-auction and auction agreements gave rise to an arguable equitable entitlement warranting interim protection; prejudice to respondents was limited by existing deposits; the son's caveat was ordered to lapse as redundant because the father's caveat preserves the claimed interest; relief was granted subject to strict procedural conditions (file substantive…
18 Apr 2013

PHILPOTT V NOBLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002984

Citation

openlaw-57aee69f_13fa_4a8d_a4bc_192498b783eb.pdf
Court

High Court

Applicants succeeded on the central issue at the first hearing (they established reasonably arguable caveatable interests) so costs follow the event up to 28 June 2012; a Scale 2B award is appropriate (not 2C), no uplift under r14.6 is justified, the appropriate 2B sum is $14,100 with $400 disbursements; no order for costs or disbursements after 28 June 2012 and costs lie where they fall for the subsequent applications.
5 Mar 2013

PHILPOTT V NOBLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002984

Citation

openlaw-29983e7a_6830_436c_a4f8_dbbd74f99356.pdf
Court

High Court

The caveators had reasonably arguable equitable easement interests such that the caveats should not lapse; the Court therefore refused wide-ranging applications to remove or materially alter the protective effect of the caveats but made limited, specific amendments to its June 2012 orders to correct typographical errors and to permit a partial lapse of Caveat 2 insofar as a portion of Lot 19 overlaps the land required for the spine road, while dismissing applications by both sides that would prematurely alter protection (including requiring immediate discharge or easement registration or excl…
2 Oct 2012

MARSHALL V BOURNEVILLE HC AK CIV-2012-404-004023

Citation

openlaw-6afefee3_7039_4d14_9486_44fb8ef9619a.pdf
Court

High Court

The applicant failed to establish a reasonably arguable proprietary interest in the registered Symonds Street property because prior judicial findings that the transactions were bona fide and that the parties separated operate as issue estoppel, transfers to the family trust preclude a proprietary constructive trust or effective tracing into the trust assets on these facts, and in any event the Court would exercise its discretion to order the caveat to lapse.

New Zealand Case Law

GUEST v WARNER [2018] NZHC 1165

LINDSAY v NOBLE INVESTMENTS LTD [2015] NZCA 588

DENG v LU [2015] NZHC 2585

PHILPOTT V NOBLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002984

PHILPOTT V NOBLE INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC CHCH CIV-2010-409-002984

MARSHALL V BOURNEVILLE HC AK CIV-2012-404-004023