13 Sept 2022
The claimed interest of 'ownership' of the land subject to easements was not reasonably arguable; however the deed created an arguable equitable interest or enforceable equitable right (including the right to require transferees to assume maintenance/repair obligations) capable of supporting a caveat, so leave to lodge a second caveat in appropriate terms was granted.
20 Dec 2019
Because Fairview acquired title without any allegation of fraud, there was no evidence it had actual knowledge of Singh's interest and no caveat was ever lodged to protect any claimed equitable interest, there were no interim rights to protect and consequently no basis to grant a stay; the ex parte application is dismissed.
15 Sept 2017
The claim was struck out because the plaintiff lacks legal standing to pursue claims against the defendant for assets of the deceased: rights to sue vested in an executor or administrator (none appointed) and beneficiaries cannot bring such claims or validly elect division or effect standing by purported assignment under the PRA; accordingly the proceedings are untenable and must be dismissed.
14 Mar 2017
The settlement notice, viewed objectively, would have been understood by reasonable purchasers (and their solicitor) to call for settlement pursuant to the agreement despite the omitted title reference; the cancellation was therefore effective before the 25 January 2017 assignment, so the assignor had no equitable interest to assign and Eastlight acquired no caveatable interest; the application to prevent lapse of the caveat is dismissed.
7 Feb 2017
The Bank's registered mortgage, given and registered in 2001, prevailed because there was no evidence the Bank had notice of or acted fraudulently in relation to any prior unregistered equitable interest claimed by the caveator; accordingly the claimed interest was defeated by operation of ss 62 and 182 of the Land Transfer Act 1952 and the caveat was properly removed, with the Bank's offer to hold surplus proceeds on trust addressing any genuine competing claims.
2 Sept 2016
The caveat was dismissed because Mr Hill no longer had any present equitable or beneficial interest capable of supporting the caveat: the Lease had expired/been cancelled and Hill's further proceedings and assertions did not establish a reasonably arguable proprietary interest; late service of opposition was extended and did not prejudice fairness.
27 Apr 2016
There is a serious question to be tried as to whether Alarm NZ holds rights under the lease (or by substitution) in carparks 73–76 and whether transfer would amount to trespass or breach of lease; however, on balance of convenience and having found damages would be an adequate remedy and having given weight to the legitimate interests of the innocent 2B purchaser and her mortgagee, the interim injunction was denied for carparks 73 and 74 but granted for carparks 75 and 76, with costs reserved.
6 Dec 2006
Hillpine has established an arguable case that Centillion, having taken a mortgage with knowledge of prior equitable sale agreements and with contractual rights to assume vendor positions and assignments, may have acted dishonestly in exercising powers to extinguish those rights; therefore the caveat cannot be removed at this interlocutory stage and Centillion's registered mortgage cannot be treated as conclusively indefeasible on this record.
15 Jun 2006
The Supreme Court held that laches did not bar the respondent's claim for specific performance because the appellant failed to demonstrate actual prejudice attributable to delay and the balance of equities favored enforcing the respondent's equitable easement (the appellant must account for the respondent's share of present costs). The appeal was dismissed and the respondent awarded costs.
15 Dec 2005
Because the Council had a personal and tangible equitable interest that made it a person who ought to have been joined, the Court ordered service of the notice of appeal and granted leave to intervene in a limited form (written submissions) to protect its interests while managing prejudice to the parties and hearing time.