Re Forrester

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE
COMMON LAW DIVISION
PROPERTY LIST

S ECI 2022 04432

IN THE MATTER of an application under s 84(1)(c) of the Property Law Act 1958 (Vic)

- and –

IN THE MATTER of an application concerning the restrictive covenant contained in Instrument of Transfer N462492B registered in the Register Book at the Office of Titles burdening the land known as 23-24 Lombard Court, Narre Warren North, Victoria, more particularly described as Lot 15 on Plan of Subdivision 209526M, being the land in Certificate of Title Volume 9789 Folio 933, by

CATHRYN SARI FORRESTER

Plaintiff

---

JUDGE:	Matthews AsJ
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	2 March 2023
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	2 June 2023
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Forrester
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2023] VSC 284

---

REAL PROPERTY – Restrictive covenants – Application for modification of covenant – Application to modify covenant to permit an additional private dwelling to be constructed on the subject land - Property Law Act 1958 (Vic), s 84(1)(c) – Vrakas v Registrar of Titles [2008] VSC 281 – Randell v Uhl [2019] VSC 668 – Application to modify covenant granted.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr M Townsend	MPW Lawyers
Livia Chambers, Catherine King, Daniel Busatta, in person, beneficiaries of the subject covenant

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 1

Background......................................................................................................................................... 2

The Subject Land and its history....................................................................................... 2
The Covenant....................................................................................................................... 3
The Plaintiff’s proposal and application.......................................................................... 4
Brief procedural history...................................................................................................... 6

Evidence............................................................................................................................................... 7

The Easton Report......................................................................................................................... 7
Beneficiaries of the Covenant............................................................................................ 8
Purpose and intent of the Covenant................................................................................. 8
Mr Easton’s approach to the assessment of substantial injury..................................... 9
The Proposal............................................................................................................ 9
An alternative complying development............................................................. 9
Planning and building controls.......................................................................... 10
The Neighbourhood............................................................................................. 10

Summary of Mr Easton’s opinion................................................................................... 13
Mr Easton’s conclusion..................................................................................................... 15

Ms Forrester’s evidence.............................................................................................................. 15
Mr Watson’s evidence................................................................................................................ 17

Applicable principles...................................................................................................................... 18

The Objectors’ submissions........................................................................................................... 20

Not in character with the neighbourhood and precedential impact................................... 21
Traffic impacts............................................................................................................................. 21
Neighbours who are not beneficiaries..................................................................................... 21

Plaintiff’s submissions................................................................................................................... 21

Consideration.................................................................................................................................... 24

Modification to allow two dwellings....................................................................................... 25
Neighbours who are not beneficiaries............................................................................ 25
Not in character with the neighbourhood..................................................................... 26
Amenities impact and traffic impact.............................................................................. 27
Precedential Effect............................................................................................................. 29

Modification in respect of garage/carport.............................................................................. 30
Modification in respect of building materials......................................................................... 31

Conclusion......................................................................................................................................... 32

HER HONOUR:

Introduction

Cathryn Sari Forrester (‘Plaintiff’) is the registered proprietor of the land known as 23-24 Lombard Court, Narre Warren North, Victoria, more particularly described as Lot 15 on Plan of Subdivision 209526M, being the land in Certificate of Title Volume 9789 Folio 933 (‘Subject Land’).

By originating motion filed on 2 November 2022, the Plaintiff seeks orders pursuant to s 84(1)(c) of the Property Law Act 1958 (Vic) (‘PLA’) for the modification of a covenant burdening the Subject Land.

In support of her application, the Plaintiff relies on the following materials:

(a) affidavit of Myles Watson, sworn 29 November 2022 (‘First Watson Affidavit’). Mr Watson is…

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Forrester involved an application for the modification of a restrictive covenant on a piece of land, with the applicant seeking to construct an additional private dwelling. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary dispute centred around whether the court should permit the applicant to deviate from the existing covenant which limited the use of the land to a single private dwelling.

The legal issues the court had to resolve were whether the modification of the covenant was justified under section 84(1)(c) of the Property Law Act 1958 (Vic) and whether the applicant's circumstances warranted a departure from the strict terms of the original covenant. The court also considered relevant precedents such as Vrakas v Registrar of Titles and Randell v Uhl to determine the appropriate criteria for modifying restrictive covenants.

In its reasoning, the court found that the circumstances of the applicant were exceptional and warranted the modification of the covenant. The court emphasised that the modification was not merely a matter of convenience but required a compelling justification. After weighing the evidence and considering the precedents, the court concluded that the modification was appropriate given the specific context and constraints of the property. Consequently, the court granted the application to modify the covenant, allowing the applicant to proceed with constructing an additional private dwelling on the land. The court's decision was grounded in the need to balance the original intent of the covenant with the practicalities of the current situation.

Continue reading Re Forrester

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established