Zeno Entertainment Pty Ltd v Kumar

Zeno Entertainment Pty Ltd brought an action against the Kumars, seeking leave to lodge further caveats against the title of certain properties owned by the defendants. The original caveats had lapsed under s 126(4) of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld), as proceedings to establish the interest claimed were not commenced within the requisite time. The central issues before the court were whether it was appropriate to grant the plaintiff leave to lodge a further caveat under s 129 of the Act, and whether the plaintiff had a caveatable interest.

The court considered the circumstances under which the original caveats lapsed and the statutory provisions governing the lodging of further caveats. The plaintiff argued that there were compelling reasons for the lapse of the original caveats, which should be considered in granting leave for new caveats. However, the court found that the plaintiff had not demonstrated any exceptional circumstances warranting the grant of leave for further caveats. The court emphasised the importance of strict compliance with the statutory timeframes for maintaining caveats and noted that the plaintiff's inability to meet these deadlines was not due to any fault on the part of the defendants. Furthermore, the court held that the plaintiff did not have a caveatable interest as it had not established a sufficient connection to the properties in question.

In light of the above, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s application and directed the Registrar of Titles to remove the lapsed caveats from the freehold land register. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the second defendant’s costs of the application. The court also directed the parties to provide information on the basis for assessing the costs and instructed the solicitor for the second defendant to prepare a form of order detailing the final orders of the court, including the removal of the lapsed caveats.