Ringen Pty Limited v Shelmerdine & Ors; Ringen Pty Limited v Coghill

The proceedings before the High Court of Australia concerned applications for special leave to appeal in two matters, Ringen Pty Limited v Shelmerdine & Ors and Ringen Pty Limited v Coghill. The applicant, Ringen Pty Limited, sought to appeal decisions of the Court of Appeal. The core dispute revolved around the existence and enforceability of easements, the abandonment of such easements, and the principles governing claims for adverse possession against registered proprietors.

The legal issues before the High Court included whether section 98 of the Transfer of Land Act, in its current form, applied retrospectively to plans of subdivision created prior to 1954. Furthermore, the Court was required to determine if this section applied to a transfer where a contrary intention was expressed, particularly at a time when such an intention could exclude the operation of a deemed easement. The applicant argued that the Court of Appeal had erred in law by applying the current version of section 98 to the circumstances of the case.

The applicant contended that the relevant statutory provision at the time of the plan of subdivision was section 2 of the Transfer of Land Act 1921. This section provided that a transfer of land by reference to a plan was deemed to have always included a grant of easements of way and drainage. The applicant's submission was that the Court of Appeal incorrectly applied a later version of section 98, which had different implications for the creation and enforceability of easements, especially in the context of plans of subdivision and transfers executed before the amendment.