Caveats - Limited extensions effectively unlimited

The decision of Young J in McCosker v Lovitt (1995) 12 BCL 146 paces an interpretation upon s 74J of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) likely to surprise the unwary respondent to proceedings in New South Wales involving an application for an order to extend a caveat. Further, the similarity in critical respects between s74J and the legislation relating to lapse and extension of caveats in some jurisdictions when contrasted with other lapse provisions suggests that a court order extending a caveat for a specified period only may have very different consequences in different jurisdictions.

The caveat in Queensland : getting it off!

This article critically analyses the provisions by which a caveat against dealings may be cleared from a land title in Queensland, namely ss 126, 127 and 128 of the Land Title Act 1994(Qld). It includes a comparison of the current provisions with the pre-existing law and provides a comprehensive guide as to the circumstances in which, and the manner by which, the current provisions may be utilised to clear caveats from land titles in Queensland.

Compensation for logdment of caveat without reasonable cause

This article examines s130 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) in detail, and includes an analysis of authorities which have interpreted comparable provisions in other Australian jurisdictions and in New Zealand. Its purpose is to provide a comprehensive guide as to the circumstances in which the court may now be expected to award compensation in respect of the lodgment or continuance of a caveat in Queensland. Finally, the author considers whether the changes which have been embodied in s130 may now be regarded as providing adequate protection for persons who suffer damage as a result of the lodgment or continuance of a caveat which cannot ultimately be sustained.

Removal of a valid caveat - how convenient?

This article analyses in detail the approaches which have been taken when the court has been called upon to order removal of a caveat, particularly in circumstances where the caveat in question is valid as to form and protects a recognisable caveatable interest in land. It examines the question in all jurisdictions, with a primary focus on Western Australia.

Legislative impact on the mortgagee’s exercise of power of sale : the need for rationalisation

Throughout Australia, regulation of the power of sale is highly inconsistent. In response to the uncertain nature of the mortgagee’s duty at common law, many legislatures have intervened. As a result, there has been a proliferation of statutory formula conferring varying degrees of protection on mortgagors. The differences in approach indicate a lack of consensus as to the best method of regulation. This article exposes the extent of the inconsistency and provides a comparative assessment of the various provisions with reference to the policy concerns that underpin legislative intervention. The article identifies a number of deficiencies associated with existing provisions and concludes that mortgagees and mortgagors alike would benefit from improved clarity and consistency. To that end, the article proposes a model provision that seeks to address the deficiencies identified.

Buyer's hardship precludes specific performance

The case is noteworthy for its consideration of the relevance of circumstances arising after formation of the contract of sale in a summary judgment context...

Commercial Leases in Australia [7th ed.]

Commercial Leases in Australia is a comprehensive guide to understanding and drafting commercial leases agreements in Australia and to managing disputes when they arise.

New sale and leasing requirements for owners of swimming pools and their application to strata schemes

This article considers the changes to the Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW)(Act) which established a State-wide online register of all private swimming pools in NSW requiring pool owners to register their pools by 19 November 2013. Amendments to the Act introduced changes to the conveyancing and residential tenancy regulations to require vendors and landlords to have a valid Compliance Certificate issued for their swimming pool before offering the property for sale or lease. This article provides a brief overview of the new sale and leasing requirements effective from 29 April 2014, focusing on its application to lot owners within strata and community title schemes and other owners of water front properties with pools on Crown Land Reserves.

New laws for off the plan contracts in Queensland

The Land Sales Act 1984 regulates “off the plan” sales in Queensland in conjunction with several provisions in the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997. Together the Acts regulate sales in both unit developments and housing estates. From 2010 to 2013 the Queensland Government undertook a comprehensive review of the Land Sales Act 1984 to identify opportunities to modernise and improve the legislation. Significant changes were recommended by the Review to align the Land Sales Act 1984 (LSA) with current surveying and conveyancing practice and to overcome a number of practical issues faced by developers under the current legislation. A significant outcome of the review is the removal of provisions related to off the plan community title sales from the LSA to the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCMA) and the Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980 (BUGTA). This article examines the Land Sales and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2014 due to commence in November 2014.

The defence of hardship to specific performance actions

The decision of Evans v Robcorp Pty Ltd[2014] QSC 26 is of interest as being an instance where the defence of hardship, in this case, financial hardship, was successfully pleaded in defence to a summary application for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land. Equity has always recognised the defence of hardship in response to an action for specific performance which, as an equitable remedy, might be refused in the discretion of the Court (Hewett v Court (1983) 149 CLR 639 at 664). However, whilst the remedy is discretionary, there are certain accepted principles which have guided the courts in their application of this defence to particular facts. It is not a blanket defence to a claim for specific performance where the buyer simply does not have the funds to complete the contract at the time when settlement is called for. Occasionally, a radical change in, say for instance, the health of the defendant between contract and completion, perhaps coupled with a long delay by a seller in calling for completion not being the fault of the buyer might enliven the defence (Patel v Ali [1984]1 Ch 283)

Is there such a thing as an “irrevocable authority”?

The Queensland Court of Appeal decision of FTV Holdings Cairns Pty Ltd v Smith [2014] QCA 217 analysed many issues concerning the enforceability of an “irrevocable authority” signed by clients directed to their solicitors regarding the payment of money to a third party. The action also drew those solicitors into the litigation as they acted contrary to that “irrevocable authority” by paying the money concerned directly to their clients but upon their clients’ later instructions. The result probably confirmed what many solicitors have believed to be the case for some time but which had never been considered in legal analysis in an appellate court. The facts of the case would be common to many day to day transactions.

A sunburnt country – storms, surges and sea levels : of insurance and flooding rains

Increasing population pressures and life-style choices are resulting in more people living in areas that are at risk of inundation from rising sea levels and flooding. However, following natural disaster events, such as the 2011 Queensland floods, many Australians discovered they were uninsured. Either their insurance policies did not cover flood; or multiple (and confusing) water-related definitions led them to believe they had cover when they did not. Several theories are analysed to try to explain what is a world-wide underinsurance problem but these do not provide an answer to the problem. This research focuses on uncovering the reasons consumers fail to adequately insure for flood and other water-related events. Recent Australian legislative attempts to overcome insureds’ confusion of water related definitions are examined for this purpose. The authors conclude that Australian and other) legislators should set a maximum premium for a minimum amount of flood and sea related cover; and restrict the building and style of homes in flood prone areas.

Compensation sought for an improper caveat

Re Brooks’ Caveat [2014] QSC 76 is a decision of Henry J delivered on 24 April 2014. The decision considers the operation of s 130 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld). That section provides that a person who lodges or continues a caveat without reasonable cause must compensate anyone else who suffers loss or damage as a result...

Caveating a mortgagee sale - The need for a uniform approach

The ability of a mortgagor to lodge a caveat, where an allegation is raised of serious impropriety by a mortgagee in exercising power of sale, may be a critical protective tool for a mortgagor. The mortgagor’s capacity, as caveator, to lodge a caveat over the mortgagor’s own title and the nature of the interest necessary to support the caveat are contentious issues. This article examines the different judicial approaches that have been adopted to date and states a case for a uniform approach to this issue across Australia in the future.