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…