Spunter Pty Ltd v Hall

Case [2006] WASC 6


SPUNTER PTY LTD -v- HALL & ANOR [2006] WASC 6



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2006] WASC 6
Case No:CIV:1142/200519 DECEMBER 2005
Coram:JENKINS J20/01/06
11Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Caveats extended on conditions
B
PDF Version
Parties:SPUNTER PTY LTD
NANCY CLOONAN HALL
THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES

Catchwords:

Conveyancing
Caveats
Extension of caveats
Form of equitable charge
Balance of convenience

Legislation:

Transfer of Land Act, s 138B, s 138C

Case References:

ALH Australia v McGlinn (1996) 7 BPR 15,179
Avco Financial Services Ltd v White [1977] VR 561
Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corp (Aust) Ltd v Burnard (1992) 27 NSWLR 415
Composite Buyers Ltd v Soong (1995) 38 NSWLR 286
Corozo Pty Ltd v Total Australia Ltd [1987] 2 Qd R 11
Custom Credit Corp Ltd v Ravi Nominees Pty Ltd (1992) 8 WAR 42
J & H Just (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Bank of New South Wales (1971) 125 CLR 546
Re Charge Card Services Ltd [1987] Ch 150
Wilson v Graham (1997) 10 BPR 19,051

Australian Security Estates Pty Ltd v Bluecrest Holdings Pty Ltd (1999) 9 BPR 17,533
Bonini & Anor v Western Australian Real Estate Custodian Ltd & Anor [2001] WASC 258
Cradock v Scottish Provident Institution (1893) 69 LT 380
First Industry Corp v Goh & Anor [2003] WASC 216
Jandric v Jandric (1999) ANZ ConvR 614
Midland Brick Company Pty Ltd v Welsh & Anor [2002] WASC 248
Montagu v Earl of Sandwich (1886) 32 Ch D

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CHAMBERS
CITATION : SPUNTER PTY LTD -v- HALL & ANOR [2006] WASC 6 CORAM : JENKINS J HEARD : 19 DECEMBER 2005 DELIVERED : 20 JANUARY 2006 FILE NO/S : CIV 1142 of 2005 BETWEEN : SPUNTER PTY LTD
    Plaintiff

    AND

    NANCY CLOONAN HALL
    First Defendant

    THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES
    Second Defendant



Catchwords:

Conveyancing - Caveats - Extension of caveats - Form of equitable charge - Balance of convenience




Legislation:

Transfer of Land Act, s 138B, s 138C




Result:

Caveats extended on conditions



(Page 2)

Category: B

Representation:


Counsel:


    Plaintiff : Mr S P O'Brien
    First Defendant : Mr N N Chin
    Second Defendant : No appearance


Solicitors:

    Plaintiff : David Taylor
    First Defendant : Nicholas N Chin
    Second Defendant : No appearance


Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

ALH Australia v McGlinn (1996) 7 BPR 15,179
Avco Financial Services Ltd v White [1977] VR 561
Bridge Wholesale Acceptance Corp (Aust) Ltd v Burnard (1992) 27 NSWLR 415
Composite Buyers Ltd v Soong (1995) 38 NSWLR 286
Corozo Pty Ltd v Total Australia Ltd [1987] 2 Qd R 11
Custom Credit Corp Ltd v Ravi Nominees Pty Ltd (1992) 8 WAR 42
J & H Just (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Bank of New South Wales (1971) 125 CLR 546
Re Charge Card Services Ltd [1987] Ch 150
Wilson v Graham (1997) 10 BPR 19,051

Case(s) also cited:



Australian Security Estates Pty…

Continue reading Spunter Pty Ltd v Hall

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Spunter Pty Ltd v Hall [2006] WASC 6
Case
[2006] WASC 6
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Spunter Pty Ltd brought this proceeding against Nancy Cloonan Hall and the Registrar of Titles. The plaintiff sought an order extending two caveats over parcels of land at Hazelmere and Mount Lawley. The first defendant opposed the application. The second defendant did not appear or file any submissions. The plaintiff relied on two deeds dated 5 October 2000 and 4 November 2000 executed by the plaintiff, the first defendant and two directors of the plaintiff. The deeds were for a loan made by the plaintiff to the first defendant. The first defendant guaranteed repayment of the loan. The deeds contained a provision that the plaintiff would have "first call" on the first defendant's "estate". The plaintiff claimed this created an equitable charge over the first defendant's land. The first defendant argued that the provision did not create an equitable charge but was a clause that would only have effect if a charge were created by some other means. The court found that there was a serious question to be tried as to whether an equitable charge had been created by the deeds. The court also found that the balance of convenience favoured extending the caveats on the condition that the plaintiff commenced and prosecuted proceedings to determine whether an equitable charge had been created by the deeds.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.