29 Jan 2016
The 3 July 2014 communication was an arithmetic/bookkeeping clarification, not a s6 'decision'; therefore no compliant review/decision existed that could give rise to a deemed decision under s137/s146, the appellant failed to demonstrate any calculation error, and the appeal is dismissed.
3 Aug 2015
The caveat was without statutory foundation because the interest asserted derived solely from a registered land covenant (not an unregistered instrument) and therefore was not registrable under s 137(1)(a); JDVC's proceeding was without merit and arguably pursued for an ulterior purpose, meeting the threshold for indemnity costs under r 14.6(4)(a); indemnity costs were awarded and quantified by the Court.
23 Oct 2013
The caveat failed because it did not describe the claimed purchaser's lien with sufficient certainty as required by s 137; however it was arguable that a purchaser's lien arose on termination of the option agreement and that clause 9.4 could be narrowly construed so as not to extinguish a lien created on termination, therefore leave was granted under s 148 to lodge a properly drafted second caveat while the current statutory caveat was ordered to lapse at the specified time.