Whall v Stamp

The appeal concerned a motion to remove a caveat lodged by the appellant, Mr. Whall, against a property owned by the respondent, Ms. Stamp. The caveat was based on Mr. Whall's claim to a life interest in the property. The primary judge had ordered that a separate question be determined as to the existence of a life interest, which ultimately resolved the substantive issue. Mr. Whall appealed this decision, arguing that the determination of the motion to remove the caveat did not necessitate a final determination of the existence of the life interest and that he was denied an opportunity to prove an agreement to confer such an interest.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in ordering the determination of a separate question regarding the existence of a life interest, and whether this procedural approach resulted in unfairness to the appellant. The court also considered whether to grant leave to rely on further evidence on appeal, specifically in relation to the alleged procedural unfairness and the possibility of a different outcome.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge's approach of determining the existence of the life interest as a separate question was inappropriate, as it effectively determined the substantive issue without allowing the appellant a full opportunity to present his case regarding the alleged agreement for a life interest. The court held that the determination of the motion to remove the caveat should not have been treated as a final determination of the existence of the life interest. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the orders of the primary judge were set aside. The matter was remitted to the Equity Division for the determination of the appellant's claims for damages in lieu of specific performance, equitable compensation, and payment for unremunerated services.