23 Dec 2008
ROMILY HOLDINGS LIMITED V MAGENTA INVESTMENTS LIMITED HC AK CIV-2008-404-006298
- Citation
- openlaw-2841d363_9ade_4dad_8dfe_4f6dab624a53.pdf
- Court
- High Court
No arguable adverse possession claim existed because the encroachment occurred after the neighboring land was brought under the Torrens system in 1938 and no s200 application had been made; relief for a wrongly placed structure does not create a present caveatable interest absent court orders; although the caveat's wording marginally conveyed an adverse possession claim by reference to s200, no substantive arguable interest was shown and therefore the caveat could not be sustained.