Kim v Anwar

The case of Kim v Anwar involved a dispute over a caveat lodged by the defendant over the plaintiffs' property. The defendant claimed an interest in the form of a charge over the property, but there was no evidence to support this claim. The plaintiffs had entered into a contract for the sale of the property with a third-party purchaser, who had issued a notice to complete. The plaintiffs sought an order for the removal of the defendant's caveat, arguing that the balance of convenience favoured its removal. The court was required to determine whether the defendant's caveat was valid and whether it should be removed.

The court found that there was no serious question to be tried regarding the defendant's interest in the property. The defendant had not provided any evidence to support their claim of a charge over the property. The court also found that the balance of convenience favoured the removal of the caveat, as the plaintiffs had entered into a binding contract for the sale of the property. The court ordered the defendant to withdraw the caveat pursuant to section 74MA of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW). The court also considered the issue of costs, finding that the defendant's caveat was lodged as part of an arrangement intended to hinder or undermine the completion of the contract for sale. The court found that it was appropriate to depart from the general rule and award costs on an indemnity basis to the plaintiffs. However, no order was made as to costs to the intent that each party bear their own costs of the proceedings.