- Track your orders
- Save your details for express checkout
Use this window to add all the registrants you wish to register on behalf of. If you want to attend the course also, ensure you add yourself as one of the registrants. Make sure you press "Save" after adding each new registrant.
This book is only available in PDF format
Author: Mark Colthart
Published: 13 March 2025
Pages: 25
It has been over five years since the last NZLS CLE webinar on the topic of caveats.
In the intervening period, much has changed. The courts have delivered a number of significant decisions on the topic, including the judgments of the Supreme Court in Cowan v Cowan, and the Court of Appeal in Green & McCahill Holdings Ltd v Ara Weiti Development Ltd (Green & McCahill). I will review both judgments in detail in ch 9.
What has remained constant, however, is that caveats continue to be contentious and highly litigated. A review of the sheer number of judgments issued on caveat applications over the last five years proves the point. It is not an understatement to say that caveat applications remain an integral part of the stock-in-trade of many civil litigation practitioners. Likewise, providing advice to clients regarding caveats, and lodging caveats, is a common feature of everyday property law practice.
The particular topics covered in this paper include:
(a) the nature of a caveat;
(b) interests that will or may support a caveat;
(c) interests that do not support a caveat;
(d) the effect of no caveat clauses;
(e) the particulars required when describing the interest claimed;
(f) applications to remove or sustain a caveat;
(g) compensation claims; and
(h) recent cases.
Before moving on, I wish to acknowledge two important sources of information I have drawn upon in preparing this paper.
First, I acknowledge the author of the chapter on caveats in Hinde McMorland and Sim Land Law in New Zealand (HMS), Justice Neil Campbell. Justice Campbell’s work is the definitive treatise on caveats in New Zealand, and the touchstone for any research in the area. I have drawn heavily upon his Honour’s work for both the structure and content of this paper.
Second, I acknowledge the Associate Judges of the High Court. The Associate Judges deal with the vast majority of the heavy workload associated with determining caveat applications. I have been fortunate to have the benefit of meeting with one of the Auckland-based Associate Judges in the course of preparing this paper. The feedbackprovided about the way in which the courts approach caveat applications has been invaluable.
I have endeavoured to state the law as at 6 March 2025.
![]() |
||
Mark Colthart FortyEight Shortland Barristers Auckland |