8 Aug 2023
Liang failed to demonstrate a reasonably arguable beneficial estate or interest in the Vaughans Road property; a personal claim for damages (loss of chance) does not create a proprietary interest in the defendant's land, and there is no evidence funds from the alleged fraud were traced to the property. The caveat cannot be maintained and the application to sustain it is dismissed.
11 Jul 2023
Because the applicants complied with the statutory notice requirement in s143(3)(a), filed a substantive application within the statutory period, and produced an affidavit providing prima facie support for continuation of the caveat, the Court was justified in exercising its power under s147(4)(b) to grant an interim order that the caveat not lapse pending further order.
30 Nov 2021
Because the applicant established a reasonably arguable claim to a proprietary interest and the factual disputes could not be resolved on affidavit evidence, the caveat must be sustained to protect the applicant's interests; the caveat was therefore upheld subject to conditions requiring prompt commencement and prosecution of substantive proceedings.
23 Oct 2019
Because the substantive proceedings are complex, the respondent was not prepared to proceed, and the issues as to caveatable interest and the 'no caveat' clause required full argument, it was appropriate under s143(4)(b) of the Land Transfer Act 2017 to make an interim order sustaining the caveat until the matter is properly argued and further orders issued.