Coopharpash Pty Ltd v Carroll [2017] NSWSC 1386

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Coopharpash Pty Ltd v Carroll [2017] NSWSC 1386 Hearing dates: 10 October 2017 Date of orders: 10 October 2017 Decision date: 10 October 2017 Jurisdiction: Equity - Duty List Before: Kunc J Decision: Applications dismissed Catchwords: REAL PROPERTY - torrens title - caveats against dealings – application for extension – no issue of principle Legislation Cited: Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Coopharpash Pty Ltd atf The Coopharpash Super Fund (ACN 610 126 791) (First Plaintiff) Stuart Alexander Collins (Second Plaintiff)

Glenn Raymond Carroll (First Defendant) Michelle Anne Carroll (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel:

J Nathan (Plaintiffs) A Avery-Williams (Defendants)

Solicitors:

Effective Legal Solutions (Plaintiffs) Simmons & McCartney (Defendants) File Number(s): 2017/302179 Publication restriction: No

EX TEMPORE Judgment (REVISED)

Summary 1. This is an application in the Duty List for the extension of a caveat or, in the alternative, for the making of freezing orders. For the reasons which follow, both applications will be dismissed. 2. By summons filed on 6 October 2017 the plaintiffs seek relief including: "Interim Relief 1 Order pursuant to s. 74F of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) extending the operation of Caveat with dealing no. AMxxxx lodged by the Second Defendant in respect of the property situated at xxxx, Wallalong in the State of New South Wales contained in folio identifier xxxx (Property). 2 Leave pursuant to s. 74O(2) of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) for the First Plaintiff to lodge and maintain a caveat in respect of the equitable interest it holds in the Property as a beneficiary of a resulting or constructive trust. Final Relief 3 Declaration that the Defendants hold their interest in the Property on trust for the Defendants. 4 Further or in the alternative, a declaration that the Second Defendant holds her interest in the Property on trust for the First Defendant. 5 Order the Defendants pay to the Plaintiffs the amount of $185,000. 6 Further or in the alternative, damages…." 1. When the plaintiffs' application for interlocutory relief came on for hearing before me today, the plaintiffs filed a further notice of motion which sought this order: "2. Upon the plaintiffs giving the undertaking as to damages, order that the defendants be restrained from disposing of, dealing with, or diminishing the value of the Property until further or other order." 1. Mr J Nathan of Counsel appeared for the plaintiffs. Ms A Avery-Williams of Counsel appeared for the defendants.