Ryan v Starr

In the matter of Ryan v Starr, the dispute centred on the validity of an unregistered easement over a parcel of land, and the extent to which the purchaser of the land was bound by that unregistered interest. The matter was determined by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central legal issue before the court was whether an unsigned term in a contract of sale, acknowledging the existence of a right of carriageway over a neighbouring property, could form part of the contract and bind the purchaser despite the unregistered nature of the easement. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the term amounted to a declaration of an express trust or if it was enforceable despite the absence of a signature.

The court examined the contract of sale between the parties, which included a clause acknowledging the existence of the right of carriageway. The court held that the unsigned term was indeed part of the contract and was binding on the purchaser. The court relied on statutory authority under the Real Property Act 1900, section 42, and the Conveyancing Act 1919, section 23C(1)(a), to determine that the term was binding. The court further held that the term did not amount to a declaration of an express trust and was therefore enforceable. In reaching this conclusion, the court applied the principles of Bahr v Nicolay (No. 2), determining that the purchaser had sufficient notice of the unregistered interest and thus was bound by it.

Ultimately, the court found in favour of the defendant, Starr, confirming that the plaintiff, Ryan, was bound by the unregistered right of carriageway acknowledged in the contract of sale. The court's decision underscores the importance of clear contractual terms and the potential consequences of failing to properly document and register interests in land. The court did not make any specific orders in relation to the easement, leaving that matter to be resolved by the parties through further negotiations or legal action.