Police & Nurses Credit Society Ltd v Weber
Case
•
[2003] WASC 45
•17 MARCH 2003
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Police & Nurses Credit Society Ltd v Weber [2003] WASC 45
[2003] WASC 45
17 MARCH 2003
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In Police & Nurses Credit Society Ltd v Weber, the Police & Nurses Credit Society, a mortgagee in possession, sought an order for the removal of a caveat lodged by Weber over certain land. The land had been transferred to Weber's son, who was the sole registered proprietor, for the purposes of a mortgage given to the plaintiff. Weber claimed that the transfer was only for the purposes of the mortgage, and that she retained the full estate and interest in the land, evidenced by a written acknowledgment. The plaintiff argued that the caveat should be removed as there was no valid caveatable interest and the arrangement had been disclosed to them.
The court considered whether Weber had a valid caveatable interest and whether the presumption of advancement applied. It was also necessary to determine whether the arrangement had been disclosed to the plaintiff. The court held that the onus was on Weber to demonstrate that there was a serious question to be tried, in the sense that she had, or may have, a valid caveatable interest. The court found that the caveat was not maintainable as Weber had failed to discharge this onus. The court further found that the presumption of advancement applied, and that the arrangement had been disclosed to the plaintiff.
The court ordered that the caveat be removed and that the Registrar of Titles be directed to remove the caveat from the register. The court held that it was not appropriate to grant an order for costs against Weber, given that the caveat had been lodged in good faith.
The court considered whether Weber had a valid caveatable interest and whether the presumption of advancement applied. It was also necessary to determine whether the arrangement had been disclosed to the plaintiff. The court held that the onus was on Weber to demonstrate that there was a serious question to be tried, in the sense that she had, or may have, a valid caveatable interest. The court found that the caveat was not maintainable as Weber had failed to discharge this onus. The court further found that the presumption of advancement applied, and that the arrangement had been disclosed to the plaintiff.
The court ordered that the caveat be removed and that the Registrar of Titles be directed to remove the caveat from the register. The court held that it was not appropriate to grant an order for costs against Weber, given that the caveat had been lodged in good faith.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Caveat
-
Adverse Possession
-
Easements & Covenants
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Ruhe v Patel [2015] ACTSC 169
Cases Citing This Decision
10
Re Webuildem Pty Ltd
[2012] NSWSC 708
Lilex Pty Limited (receiver and manager appointed) and Bred & Chees Pty Limited (receiver and manager appointed) v Smallseeds Pty Limited
[2011] NSWSC 1426
Ruhe v Patel
[2015] ACTSC 169
Cases Cited
9
Statutory Material Cited
1
Bomford v Barrett
[2002] WASC 304
Bashford v Bashford
[2008] WASC 138
Bashford v Bashford
[2008] WASC 138