Armstrong Scalisi Holdings Pty Ltd ACN 114980586 v Jovic

Armstrong Scalisi Holdings Pty Ltd, the plaintiff, filed an application against Jovic, the defendant, seeking the extension of a caveat lodged over a property. The dispute concerns the plaintiff's assertion of an entitlement to claim an equitable charge and/or equitable mortgage over the property, said to arise by virtue of a letter of engagement. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issues addressed by the court involved determining whether there was a serious question to be tried concerning the plaintiff's claim for an equitable charge or equitable mortgage. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the balance of convenience favoured the extension of the caveat. The plaintiff argued that the terms of the letter of engagement between the parties gave rise to an equitable interest in the property, which warranted the continuation of the caveat. Conversely, the defendant contended that the terms of the engagement did not support such a claim and that the balance of convenience did not favour extending the caveat.

The court, after careful consideration, determined that there was indeed a serious question to be tried regarding the plaintiff's claim for an equitable charge or equitable mortgage. The court found that the terms of the letter of engagement were ambiguous and required further investigation to ascertain the true intentions of the parties. Additionally, the court concluded that the balance of convenience did favour the extension of the caveat, given the potential impact on the property's title and the interests of any prospective purchasers. Therefore, the court granted the plaintiff's application for the extension of the caveat.

In light of the findings, the court ordered the extension of the caveat over the property in question, pending the outcome of further proceedings to determine the nature and extent of any equitable interests claimed by the plaintiff.