NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Syndication Capital Group Pty Limited v MDR Cornish Investments Pty Limited [2011] NSWSC 1289 Hearing dates: Thursday, 6 October 2011 Decision date: 06 October 2011 Jurisdiction: Equity Division - Duty List Before: Brereton J Decision: Caveat extended until further order. Catchwords: REAL PROPERTY - Application to extend operation of caveat - caveator must show claim has or may have substance - test akin to that for interlocutory injunctions - caveator claims interest described as 'equitable fee simple as purchaser of exchanged contract for sale' and as beneficiary of a constructive trust - seriously arguable that contracts exchanged and/or circumstances give rise to constructive trust exist - caveat said to be defective in form as deals with interest in four lots whilst contract pertained to only one lot - possible for plaintiff to obtain relief relating to whole of subject land - caveat also allegedly defective as misdescribes contract - defect overlooked under (NSW) Real Property Act 1900, s 74L - plaintiff has seriously arguable claim - balance of convenience factors include defendant being unable to obtain finance and incurring interest costs - plaintiff and plaintiff's principal proffer undertaking as to damages - Court will only allow caveator's priority to be jeopardised in rare circumstances - caveat extended. Legislation Cited: (NSW) Conveyancing Act 1919, s 57, s 60 (NSW) Real Property Act 1900, s 74K, s 74L Cases Cited: Fitzgibbons v Shaftsbury Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 525 Queensland Estate Pty Limited v Co-Ownership Land Development Pty Limited (1969) Qd R 150 Re Paul; (1912) 19 WN (NSW) 114 Re Henderson's Caveat (1998) 1 Qd R 632 Roclin Investments Pty Ltd v Makris (1974) 7 SASR 485 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Syndication Capital Group Pty Limited (plaintiff) MDR Cornish Investments Pty Limited (defendant) Representation: Counsel: Dr B Glennon (plaintiff) Mr W Young (defendant) Solicitors: David H. Cohen & Co Solicitor (plaintiff) Bransgrove Lawyers (defendant) File Number(s): 2011/298904
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate