Law Notes Property and Equity 2 Notes
UNSW Property and Equity 2 notes. Includes detailed case and materials notes and super summaries ideal to take into an open book exam. Structure of cases and materials notes:
Class 1: The Torrens System and Indefeasibility
Class 2: Indefeasibility of What?
Class 3 - The in personam exception
Class 4 - Other exceptions and overriding statutes
Class 5 - The register, equitable interests and caveats
Class 6 - Competing equitable interests
Class 7 - Co-ownership
Class 8 - Rights of enjoymen...
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Property and Equity 2 Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Concept | Key Cases | Issue | Principle | Ratio | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Must benefit the land | Clem Smith Far-away Racing circuit | Easements in gross? |
|
| Tulk v Moxhay is authority for the proposition that a restrictive covenant may run with the land in equity and be enforced against subsequent purchasers Note – the restrictive covenant must ‘touch/concern’ the land of the covenantee (Marten v Flight Refuelling) – conducting specified business may (Newton Abbot v Williamson & Treadgold)
Public authorities can impose restrictions without benefited land (s88D/E – CA) – solves the problem in LCC v Allen
|
| |||||
Re Martyn Gotta be on the register |
| A common scheme of development can be created through s 88B of the CA (p95) Notable characteristics of RCs
| |||
Re Louis Reciprocal burdens |
In light of the Westfield Management decision this case may well go the other way |
Covenants and Easements
Concept | Key Cases | Principle | Ratio | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Dominant and Servient tenements | Hill v Tupper ‘pleasure boats’ |
|
Lyria makes some interesting policy points regarding this case and easements in gross in general – don’t want land to be burdened up with all manner of covenants; it would reduce the free flow of money and purchasing of property. |
Gas & Fuel Corporation of VIC v Barba – extrinsic evidence admissible to Cf Gapes v Fish – reservation of right of way, made no reference to a dominant tenement. Held – attempt to create easement in gross; conveyed a personal license
**All these cases are overruled by s 88(1) of the CA – easement isn’t enforceable unless it clearly indicates:**
Easements in gross can only be created by prescribed authorities (s 88A CA) – but in NT anyone can
Easements need not... |
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Property and Equity 2 Notes.
UNSW Property and Equity 2 notes. Includes detailed case and materials notes and super summaries ideal to take into an open book exam. Structure of cases and materials notes:
Class 1: The Torrens System and Indefeasibility
Class 2: Indefeasibility of What?
Class 3 - The in personam exception
Class 4 - Other exceptions and overriding statutes
Class 5 - The register, equitable interests and caveats
Class 6 - Competing equitable interests
Class 7 - Co-ownership
Class 8 - Rights of enjoymen...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started