Cases - getting title LTA

Question 1

Burmeister v O’Brien

Answer 1

• OBs committed fraud
• They knew Bs were cheated out of their title and carried out actions to perpetuate this
• Held to be constructive trustees with obligation to transfer title back immediately

Question 2

Efstratiou, Glantschnig and Petrovic v Glantschnig

Answer 2

Facts:
- Couple each contributed half to house
- Only in husband’s name
- Husband sold the house
Held:
- Constructive trust
- Buyer had enough knowledge to be wilfully blind
- Low price, quick sale, etc.

Question 3

Satnam Investments Ltd v Worger

Answer 3

• Legal advice can be used as insulation from LTA fraud, but not guaranteed. Also need to consider other requirements.

Question 4

Tuscany v Gill

Answer 4

Held:
- Had purchased units knowing of G’s interest
- Made assurances he later defaulted on
- Clearly brought property to develop and was not honest in his dealing

Question 5

Potts v Anderson

Answer 5

Held:
- Indefeasability only protects against equitable interests in which the registered proprietor has no personal liability

Question 6

Frazer v Walker

Answer 6

Clarifies element 3: recognised course of action
- Can be any legal claim in statute, common law or equity.

Question 7

Smith v Hugh Watt Society Inc

Answer 7

The key issue is the knowledge or involvement of the registered proprietor in the unconscionable or illegal act or omission

Question 8

Dollars & Sense Finance v Nathan

Answer 8

In Personam Claim elements:
1. Must not be inconsistent with the objectives of the torrens system
2. Must involve unconscionable conduct by current RO
3. Must be a recognised course of action

Question 9

Warin v Registrar-General of Land HC Whangarei

Answer 9

Facts:
- Couple brought land under assumption it was GFL, it was actually MFL
- Upheld registered title over TTWMLA
- Preferred the certainty the LTA gave

Question 10

Barlow v Phillips

Answer 10

Non-compliance with TTWMA is not an exception to indefeasibility

Question 11

Muraahi and Barlow v Phillips

Question 12

Bunt v Hallinan

Answer 12

Receiving legal advice does not mean you can ignore knowledge of material facts which would make that advice suspect.

Question 13

Harvey v Prangley

Answer 13

• Proprietary Estopple
• Daughter knew about parents licence and had a moral obligation to give effect to it