Arabatzis & Severino & Anor

In *Arabatzis & Severino & Anor*, the Supreme Court of Victoria was asked to determine whether a caveat lodged by the respondents, Mr. and Mrs. Severino, against land owned by the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Arabatzis, should be maintained. The dispute arose from a contract for the sale of the applicants' property, which the respondents sought to purchase. Following the execution of the contract, the respondents lodged a caveat, asserting an equitable interest in the land. The applicants sought to have this caveat removed.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the respondents had established a sufficient caveatable interest in the land to justify the continued existence of the caveat. This required the Court to consider the nature of the equitable interest claimed by the respondents, specifically whether their rights under the contract for sale constituted a registrable interest or a proprietary interest capable of supporting a caveat. The Court also had to assess whether the respondents had acted in good faith in lodging the caveat.

Macmillan J reasoned that a caveatable interest arises from a proprietary right, not merely a personal contractual right. His Honour referred to established principles that a purchaser under a contract for sale acquires an equitable interest in the land from the time of the contract, provided the contract is specifically enforceable. However, the Court found that the respondents had not demonstrated that the contract was specifically enforceable at the time the caveat was lodged, nor had they established any other proprietary interest. Consequently, the Court concluded that the respondents had failed to establish a sufficient caveatable interest.

The Court ordered that the caveat lodged by the respondents be removed.