Reschke v Trevor Reschke Nominees Pty Ltd (NO.2)

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia heard an appeal concerning a caveat lodged by the applicant, Mr. Reschke, against land registered under the Torrens system. The respondent, Trevor Reschke Nominees Pty Ltd, sought the removal of this caveat. The dispute arose from a prior proceeding where Mr. Reschke had sought to enforce an alleged oral agreement for the sale of the land to him by the respondent.

The central legal issues before the Full Court were whether the primary judge erred in finding that Mr. Reschke did not have a caveatable interest in the land, and consequently, whether the caveat should be removed. This involved determining the nature and enforceability of the alleged oral agreement, and whether it gave rise to a proprietary interest in the land that could sustain a caveat against dealings.

The Full Court upheld the primary judge's decision, finding that Mr. Reschke had failed to establish a sufficient proprietary interest to justify the continued lodgement of the caveat. The Court reasoned that the alleged oral agreement, even if proven, did not create a registrable interest or an equitable interest that would be protected by a caveat. The principles applied focused on the requirements for a caveatable interest under the relevant Torrens title legislation, emphasizing that a mere contractual right, without more, is generally insufficient to support a caveat. The Court noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any steps taken towards the creation of a registrable interest or any equitable interest arising from part performance or other recognised equitable doctrines.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the primary judge for the removal of the caveat were affirmed.