What is a caveatable interest?
A caveat may be placed on a property to prevent anyone else registering a dealing with that property. They are used to protect interests in land and ‘give notice’ to the world of this interest. However, before lodging a caveat, the individual must ensure that they have a caveatable interest.
What are some grounds to lodge a caveat over land?
Caveats are often used in the following situations:
- To secure a party’s interest, for example, when parties have contributed jointly to the property’s development, or where only one party is the registered proprietor;
- a purchaser’s interest under an agreement for sale;
- estate disputes (multiple beneficiaries);
- to provide security in business transactions;
- an interest arising from a registered or equitable mortgage;
- the security interest of a creditor who has been granted a charge over the land;
- a purchaser’s lien, etc.
It is important to always obtain legal advice prior to seeking to lodge a caveat, as there are significant consequences for lodgement where a caveatable interest does not exist. Merely being in a dispute with the property owner is insufficient grounds to lodge a caveat.
Recently, VCAT found Victorian lawyer Hubert Fong guilty of three counts of lodging a wrongful caveat on a neighbour’s property without proper basis. Mr Fong lodged his first caveat in 2016 over a dispute of a fence line, using the grounds of ‘adverse possession by exclusive occupation’. The second and third caveats lodged by Mr Fong in 2017 and 2018 claimed that the registered proprietor was ‘entitled to possession of the certificate of title for the land and to prevent improper dealings’.
The neighbour made an application to Land Titles to which Mr Fong did not commence proceedings to substantiate his clients claims; and the first and third caveats lapsed. The second caveat was withdrawn prior to an application being made.
So, what is an improper caveat?
An improper caveat is lodged to achieve something other than securing an ‘interest in land’. A caveat is commonly found improper where it is used as a ‘bargaining chip’ to try pressure the landowner to negotiate or to recover an unsecured debt. Where a caveat has been lodged improperly, in most instances it will be removed.[1]
What happened to Mr Fong?
It was found by VCAT that there were no plausible grounds for any of Mr Fong’s caveats. However, VCAT found that Mr Fong did not act ‘knowingly or recklessly’ in the lodgement of these caveats which lacked ‘legal, equitable or possessory interest in the neighbour’s property’. Mr Fong now recognises it was wrong as he failed to “critically examine” the grounds and carefully consider whether it supported a caveat. VCAT suggested that the Magistrates Court (Fences Act 1968) was a more appropriate avenue for the fence line dispute claim.
An administrative mention has been scheduled to determine penalty for damage that has resulted by the lodging of these wrongful caveats.
Do you have a legal matter you need assistance with? Sanicki Lawyers can help. To seek professional advice, please contact us on (03) 9510 9888.
[1] Piroshenko v Grojsman & Ors [2010] VSC 240 (2 June 2010).