PRENDERGAST & PARSONS

In *Prendergast & Parsons*, the Supreme Court of Victoria was asked to determine whether a caveat lodged by the respondents, Prendergast and Parsons, against a parcel of land owned by the applicant, was valid. The applicant sought to have the caveat removed.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the respondents had a caveatable interest in the land. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the respondents' claim to an equitable interest in the land, arising from an alleged agreement for sale, was sufficiently arguable to justify the continued existence of the caveat.

Macmillan J reasoned that for a caveat to be validly lodged, the caveator must demonstrate an arguable case for an equitable interest in the land. In this instance, the respondents relied on an unsigned document which they contended constituted an agreement for sale. However, the Court found that the document lacked the essential elements of a contract for the sale of land, particularly a clear intention to be bound and sufficient certainty regarding the terms of the agreement. Consequently, the Court concluded that the respondents had failed to establish an arguable equitable interest in the land.

The Court ordered that the caveat lodged by the respondents be removed.