KPE Superannuation Fund Pty Limited v Two Tempe Holdings Pty Ltd; KPE Superannuation Fund Pty Limited v QRM Holdings Pty Ltd

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the KPE Superannuation Fund Pty Limited contested the removal of a caveat entered by Two Tempe Holdings Pty Ltd and QRM Holdings Pty Ltd over a property. The KPE Superannuation Fund sought to have the caveats removed to proceed with a sale of the property. The court was tasked with determining whether the caveats should be removed based on the criteria of a serious question to be tried and the balance of convenience.

The legal issues before the court involved the application of section 74G of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), which governs the removal of caveats. The court needed to assess if there was a serious question to be tried concerning the validity of the caveats and whether the balance of convenience favoured maintaining the caveats. The alternative security offered by the KPE Superannuation Fund was also considered in determining the balance of convenience.

The court found that the serious question to be tried was not met, as the evidence did not support the validity of the claims made by the caveators. Additionally, the balance of convenience clearly favoured the removal of the caveats. The alternative security provided by the KPE Superannuation Fund mitigated the risk of loss to the caveators if the caveats were removed. Consequently, the court ordered the removal of the caveats entered by Two Tempe Holdings Pty Ltd and QRM Holdings Pty Ltd.