Refina Pty Ltd v Binnie

Refina Pty Ltd commenced legal proceedings against Binnie, seeking to establish possessory title over a strip of land that was part of Binnie's property. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary issue before the court was whether Refina had adversely possessed the strip of land, thereby entitling it to apply for possessory title. Additionally, the court had to determine if Refina's negotiations and offer to purchase the disputed strip constituted an acknowledgement of Binnie's title, thereby forfeiting its entitlement to apply for possessory title. Another matter before the court was whether the registration of a plan of subdivision incorporating the disputed strip into a larger lot destroyed the possessory claim. Finally, the court considered whether Refina had any personal equity against Binnie in respect of the disputed strip arising from its possession.

The court found that Refina had indeed adversely possessed the strip of land, thereby entitling it to apply for possessory title. However, the court held that the negotiations and offer to purchase the strip by Refina were merely an offer of compromise, not an acknowledgement of Binnie's title. The court also determined that the registration of the plan of subdivision incorporating the disputed strip into a larger lot destroyed Refina's possessory claim. Finally, the court held that adverse possession does not give the possessor any legal or equitable claim against the registered proprietor. Consequently, Refina was not entitled to an order requiring the Registrar-General to correct the error by omitting the strip from the plan, as the registered plan accorded with the Council's intent, notwithstanding that it was not expressly referred to in the consent to subdivision.