Black v Garnock : implications for Queensland conveyancing practice
Dixon, William M. (2008) Black v Garnock : implications for Queensland conveyancing practice. The Queensland Lawyer, 28(4), pp. 171-173.
What was previously established as a fundamental principle, that a judgment creditor may take no interest beyond what the judgment debtor could give, has now been called into question by the decision of the High Court in Black v Garnock  HCA 31. This article examines the implications of the decision of the High Court for conveyancing practice in Queensland.
The relevant facts of Black v Garnock  HCA 31 may be briefly stated:
The Garnocks and the Luffs, as purchasers, entered a contract to purchase a rural property from Mrs Smith with settlement due on 24 August 2005. On 23 August 2005, a creditor obtained a writ against Mrs Smith from the District Court of New South Wales. No caveat was lodged on behalf of the purchasers prior to settlement (there being no equivalent, in New South Wales, of the Queensland settlement notice mechanism).
Impact and interest:
Citation countsare sourced monthly fromand citation databases.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloadsdisplays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||conveyancing, s 105A(2) of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW), s 105B(2) of the Real Property Act 1900 (NSW)|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Property Law (excl. Intellectual Property Law) (180124)|
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law|
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2008 Lawbook Company|
|Deposited On:||06 Jul 2011 09:53|
|Last Modified:||16 May 2013 03:48|
Repository Staff Only: item control page