14 Mar 2018
The court granted the stay of the 22 February 2018 judgment, leaving Mr Stafford's caveat in place until further order of the Court of Appeal, declined to order any undertaking as to damages, and consequently did not decide ACC's recall application as it became unnecessary.
30 Sept 2016
Horseshoe failed to demonstrate an arguable proprietary interest in Lot 7 under the sale agreements: the contracts either vested ownership of Lot 7 in a lot owner or contemplated a company to be incorporated by the vendor (not Horseshoe), and Horseshoe was not the vendor nor incorporated the company; Lepionka as mortgagee in possession validly adopted vendor rights under s 179 PLA and may transfer free of the caveat under s 105 LTA; consequently the caveat could not be maintained and was ordered removed.
16 Dec 2013
Neither BNZ nor AFL gave consent to VPL's sale to the respondent: BNZ's purported consent was conditional on receipt of approved net sale proceeds which did not occur, and AFL did not give written prior consent nor did its agent have authority to consent; therefore mortgagees' rights prevail and the respondent's caveat cannot be maintained and must be removed under s 143 LTA.
19 Apr 2011
Indemnity costs were justified because the respondents' caveat had no real prospect of success, the applicant had given clear, authoritative notice and time to remove the caveat (including extensions), the applicant did not act precipitously in filing, and the costs claimed were reasonable in the circumstances.
3 Dec 2009
The court accepted that the proceedings had been brought to the first respondent's attention by email and that, absent any evidence of fraud, the registered mortgage prevailed over the lodged caveats; consequently it was appropriate and safe to order removal of the caveats and to grant the applicant's application given the urgency of an imminent settlement.
3 Nov 2009
The caveator failed to demonstrate a reasonably arguable registerable interest because no valid tender to redeem was made and any subordinate equitable interest would be cleared by the mortgagee sale; alleged breaches by the mortgagee do not justify preserving the caveat and can be pursued separately, therefore the caveat must be removed.
30 May 2007
On an objective reading of the brokerage agreement acceptance of a loan introduced by C M M could trigger liability for brokerage fees and the agreement expressly authorised registration of a mortgage to secure fees; because disputed factual matters about the parties' discussions and intentions could affect interpretation and enforcement, it was arguable that C M M had an equitable interest supporting the caveat, so monies held in trust must remain until final determination.