Brogue Tableau Pty Ltd v Binningup Nominees Pty Ltd

Link copied
Case Copied 73 min read

JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

TITLE OF COURT :   THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)

CITATION:   BROGUE TABLEAU PTY LTD -v- BINNINGUP NOMINEES PTY LTD [2007] WASCA 179

CORAM:   WHEELER JA

PULLIN JA
BUSS JA

HEARD:   15 MAY 2007

DELIVERED          :   31 AUGUST 2007

FILE NO/S:   CACV 97 of 2006

BETWEEN:   BROGUE TABLEAU PTY LTD (ACN 009 271 970)

Appellant

AND

BINNINGUP NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 008 794 938)
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction              :  SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram  :MASTER SANDERSON

Citation  :BINNINGUP NOMINEES PTY LTD -v- BROGUE TABLEAU PTY LTD [2006] WASC 156

File No  :CIV 1001 of 2006

Catchwords:

Torrens system - Caveat - Caveatable interest existed - Absolute caveat lodged - Court ordered removal of absolute caveat - Claim for compensation - Whether caveat was lodged without reasonable cause - The "imputing" to a client of a solicitor's absence of reasonable grounds for advice where the client, on the basis of that advice, lodges a caveat

Words and phrases - "Without reasonable cause"

Legislation:

Transfer of Land Act 1893 (WA), s 137, s 138, s 139, s 140, s 142

Result:

Appeal allowed

Category:    A

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant:     Mr D G Robertson

Respondent:     Mr C L Zelestis QC & Mr J A Thomson

Solicitors:

Appellant:     Arthur Metaxas & Co

Respondent:     Tottle Partners

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Beca Developments Pty Ltd v Idameneo (No 92) Pty Ltd (1990) 21 NSWLR 459

Bedford Properties Pty Ltd v Surgo Pty Ltd [1981] 1 NSWLR 106

Binningup Nominees Pty Ltd v Brogue Tableau Pty Ltd [2004] WASC 14

Black v Garnock [2007] HCA 31

Bolton v Excell (Unreported, WASCA, Library No 930175, 22 February 1993)

Bundock Bros v Bergl & Co (1897) 8 QLJ 106

Coles KMA Ltd v Sword Nominees Pty Ltd (1986) 44 SASR 120

Commonwealth Bank of Australia v Baranyay [1993] 1 VR 589

Commonwealth Dairy Produce Equalisation Committee Ltd v Hanson [1944] QSR 95

Dalleagles Pty Ltd v Australian Securities Commission (1991) 4 WAR 325

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Corwest Management Pty Ltd [1978] WAR 129

Dykstra v Dykstra (1991) 22 NSWLR 556

Edmonds v Donovan (2005) 12 VR 513

Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 87

Farvet Pty Ltd v Frost [1997] 2 Qd R 39

General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125

Gordon v Treadwell Stacey Smith [1996] 3 NZLR 281

Hooke v Holland [1984] WAR 16

J & H Just (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Bank of New South Wales (1971) 125 CLR 546

John Street Marina Pty Ltd v Minister for Transport [2005] WASC 171

Kaihu Valley Railway Co v Kauri Timber Co (1889) 11 NZLR 403

Kuper v Keywest Constructions Pty Ltd (1990) 3 WAR 419

Lee v Ross (No 2) [2003] NSWSC 507; (2003) 11 BPR 20,991

Leros Pty Ltd v Terara Pty Ltd (1992) 174 CLR 407

Longmuir v The Commonwealth (1986) 88 FLR 399

McKellar v Singh [1999] WASC 145

Midland Brick…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Brogue Tableau Pty Ltd v Binningup Nominees Pty Ltd and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2007] WASCA 179
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Brogue Tableau Pty Ltd sought to have an absolute caveat removed from their property title, which had been lodged by Binningup Nominees Pty Ltd. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Western Australia, where the primary question was whether Binningup had lodged the caveat without reasonable cause, thus entitling Brogue to compensation. The court was tasked with determining whether the caveat was justified based on the advice given by a solicitor to their client, Binningup.

The legal issues centred on the circumstances under which a caveat could be deemed to have been lodged without reasonable cause. The court had to consider whether it was appropriate to impute the solicitor's lack of reasonable grounds to Binningup, given that Binningup acted on the solicitor's advice in lodging the caveat. The court had to balance the protection of property rights under the Torrens system with the need to ensure that caveats are not used frivolously or as a tactical maneuver.

The court held that the caveat was not lodged without reasonable cause, as Binningup had a bona fide belief in the existence of a caveatable interest based on the solicitor's advice. The court found that imputing the solicitor's lack of reasonable grounds to Binningup was not appropriate, as Binningup had genuinely relied on the advice. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the order for Brogue to pay compensation to Binningup was set aside. The court's decision emphasised the importance of the client's belief in the caveatable interest, independent of the solicitor's advice, in determining whether a caveat was lodged without reasonable cause.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal allowed

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.