Boral Recycling Pty Ltd v Wake

Boral Recycling Pty Ltd sought an extension of a caveat over a property from the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The property was subject to an agreement between Boral and Wake, where Boral agreed to provide finance to Wake in return for a security interest over the property. This agreement was never stamped as required by law, and the primary issue before the Court was whether the unstamped agreement created an equitable mortgage, thereby entitling Boral to extend the caveat. The Court found that the agreement did not constitute a legal mortgage due to the absence of stamping, and therefore could not be considered a caveatable interest. The Court held that an equitable mortgage was not sufficient to support the extension of a caveat, and dismissed Boral's application. The Court concluded that the unstamped agreement did not confer upon Boral any rights over the property that could be protected by a caveat. The decision highlights the importance of stamping agreements to create legal interests in property, and the Court's reluctance to recognise equitable interests in the context of caveats.