Trentelman v The Owners - Strata Plan 76700 (No 2); The Owners - Strata Plan 76700 v Trentelman (No 2)

Trentelman v The Owners - Strata Plan 76700 involved a dispute between the plaintiff and the owners of a strata plan, concerning the continued use of a swimming pool. The dispute reached the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the plaintiff sought a declaration and an injunction, while the defendants sought to set aside an earlier judgment. The plaintiff claimed that he had been led to believe that he would have continued use of the swimming pool, and sought an order that this be satisfied by the grant of an easement over the pool, as well as an injunction to secure use of the pool pending registration of the easement. The defendants argued that the plaintiff's claim for an easement was not supported by the evidence and that the notation on the registered plan of subdivision was legally ineffective.

The court was required to determine whether the plaintiff had established a proprietary estoppel and whether an injunction should be granted to secure use of the pool pending registration of the easement. The court found that the plaintiff had established a proprietary estoppel by virtue of the promise made to him by the defendants, and that equity regarded as done that which ought to have been done. The court also found that an injunction should be granted to secure use of the pool pending registration of the easement, as the plaintiff had shown that the defendants were likely to frustrate his right to use the pool. The court refused to make a declaration regarding the legal effectiveness of the notation on the registered plan of subdivision, finding that the issue was not of sufficient immediate significance.

The court ordered that an easement be granted to the plaintiff over the swimming pool, and that an injunction be issued to secure use of the pool pending registration of the easement. The court also set aside the earlier judgment in favour of the plaintiff, finding that it was no longer necessary to make a declaration regarding the legal effectiveness of the notation on the registered plan of subdivision. The court noted that the defendants were to bear their own costs of the appeal and cross-appeal.