property law essay (1 Viewer)

[MaryJane]

Check the discussion board. Shayne wrote something. According to IAC v Courtenay (or however you spell it: Taylor J's judgement), and s 43 of the RPA, they dont lose out because of the caveat. Because the 'settlement' (exchange of money and possession of CoT) was done before the caveats, they take it free of the mortgages, and "excel" to registration.

I was unsure whether this was correct, but, based on what Shayne said, I'm assuming its along the right track.

Edit: here:

Author: Shayne Davenport
Date: Thursday, May 25, 2006 12:32pm

As far as the quote from Gray and Edgeworth is concerned it is talking about
priorities between competing equitable interests and how the lodgement of a
caveat will affect this. Because a caveat acts as notice that a prior
equitable interest is claimed, the time that it is lodged will be critical.
In order for the holder of a later interest to be able to say they had no
notice of the prior interest (and this will be relevant for both the
application of s43A and the "rule" in Moffett v Dillon) the relevant time is
settlement ie the payment of money and the handing over of the CT. This is
the case for both old system and unregistered Torrens interests.

I'm off to sleep - I'm so buggered. But I'll be back tomorrow while at work

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

but that's for determination between equitable interests isn't it? i.e. if u're an equitable interest holder and u lodge the caveat too late, U can't stop the other guy getting registered. but a caveat operates as a freeze on the register (so can assume registration has not yet occurred) and now the current registered owner is in the picture and THEY can stop them registering or prevailing - isn't that right? also i don't think 43A has operation here as the instrument is void.

 

[MaryJane]

Hmmm... perhaps. I'm so tired, I'm not really sure... But, because tom and katie arent registered, they just have an equitable interest too, right?

And, with the void instrument stuff, see Breskvar v Wall and Frazer v Walker.

Night *yawn*

 

[iwannarock]

i just got so confused then.

aaaaaaaaaah i still havent started writing yet and its 11pm!

shit shit shit i gotta get to work

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

how'd we all go?
mj breskvar etc all involved registered parties - it didn't matter their instruments were void because registration cures defects... which would be ok if u reckon tom and katie were registered. i personally reckon they wouldn't have been, but i know quite a few people who go either way on the issue so i think the answers will vary quite a bit. and really, that issue could have gone either way - ur right in that the caveats wouldn't have been effective in defeating tk's interest - so whether the registrar general registered them or not is open to interpretation - i don't think he would have until the courts dealt with it, but it was probably in his discretion to do so.
anyway, it's all over now. woot!
can't wait until const...

 

[MaryJane]

I'm so glad thats over. Sheesh! I finished it in my lunch break at work, and emailed it to Skittled to print and hand in for me. So I was slightly stressed until that was all done.

I'm hoping for a pass... I think I got the (majority) of the "solutions" right, but my writing was horrible! You could tell it was a didgy job.

Sigh.

You're right scarecrow - on to const!!

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

i don't think writing style's a big thing with problem qs i think they more allocated marks on ur aguments and whether u look at the relevant laws etc

 

[iwannarock]

i've heard a rumour flying around that for those 1st essays for property 30% of people failed.......and that these problem ones aren't looking too good either.

now my maths isn't too good........but if 30% of people failed............probability will tell us that one of us 3 failed. if i was a prospective gambler...........the money would have to be on me.


i'm doomed.

 

[MaryJane]

I've heard that rumour too, but apparently, the girl I heard it off is in Nicole's tute. She said that those who failed, failed because they got the facts wrong in cases (eg. in Steel v Houghton they said the gleaners won), got the names of the parties wrong (eg. steel v haugtton), and mixed up the names of the judges (eg. saying Stephen J was in S v H, when, in fact, he was in Attorney General v Brown). Just things like that. Which would make perfect sense really, because it shows that they have no grasp of what we've learnt. And it would look very rushed.

Regardless, its left me on a knifes-edge waiting to get it back. After hearing that rumour, I just want a P!

I'm sure you wont be one of those rumoured 30% IWR!! *hug*

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

i heard that too
i've been border line psychotic since i cannot explain how freaked out i am
i've heard from people in nicole's tute that she gave people like 2 out of 30 based on poor grammer i am so screwed i don't think i've ever handed in an essay without at least one grammatical error
i was so upset when i heard that that i walked straight out of my mum's office (after ranting like i was honestly insane at my friend on the phone for twenty minutes) without a key and managed to lock myself in the bathrooms untill i managed to get out through a side door a level a few floors up forgot to lock and got out, begged for change on the street and called my mum.
so i'm a little concerned as well.... lol
plus i handed it in with the wrong cover sheet oh dear. i don't know how much of the rumours are true but i'm really concerned about the marking - and that was not my best essay.
i think alot of people are going to be very upset on wednesday. i just hope the three of us aren't among them.

 

[MaryJane]

2/30?? Holy crap. I was thinking it would be, like 12/30 or something, but 2?! Surely people in third year arent that terrible at essay writing...

Oh gosh. Oh crap. Do we get them on Wednesday, or are they handed out in tutes? I'm kinda hoping its Wednesday, rather than 9am tomorrow morning.. I guess, if I did get it tomorrow, it would be out of the way.

Good luck my lovelies!! We can do it!! *hugs*

 

[clairegirl]

law sounds hard :\

 

[MaryJane]

So, here's the low down:

23% of the unit failed. The reasons pretty much listed by Nicole in the tute is what I said above: incorrect judgements etc etc, as well as not actually arguing anything. People just regurgitated arguments. And, others didnt understand the concepts behind their essays: like, people didnt know what "capitalism", "feudalism" etc.

Edit: just thought I'd elaborate (because I want to procrastinate). She also said that everyone started from a zero mark - no starting from a pass like they do in every other law subject. So that sucked. And she said that most students jumped up to the pass mark by the first page, but others (like those who failed, and those who just passed) had to "crawl" their way up to their mark. If I was ever planning on doing her 4th year law subject (not that I was, but), I would seriously re-think it. I think she's an awesome lecturer, really knows her stuff, but is a bit of a... I dont know... 'hard task-master'.

I know one person who got a HD, and another dear friend who failed (). I got 74%, so Ivy is a happy chappy

 

[iwannarock]

congratulations MJ!

i got mine back today too. i Passed!.

You're not gonna believe this, but i also managed to pass whilst getting 10% off too. i got 20/30 taken down to 17/30. After all the rumours of big failure rates the fact that i passed after losing 10% is amazing:rofl:

Apparently this whole 3 years of law i've been putting whats called "endnotes" not footnotes in my essays. Its just how i always did everything cuz i had no idea how to use MS word. The first 2 years of law markers never even made a comment at how i footnoted, absolutely nothing. So i was blissfully ignorant.

That is ofcourse until Nicole Graham got a hold of one of my essays. Its just how i've always done things but now they tell me its wrong. It also means im already 10% down for the problem question, i footnoted the same way....my problem question was shite i know that 10% will make me fail. It would be good if i got the essay back before the problem question....i might have actually learnt the right way and not lost 10%.

Bloody anne and xada they've let me wander into Nicole Graham's grammar nazi-ism completely unaware!:mad1:

oh i can't stay mad at them. their leniency got me into 3rd year law:rofl:

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

wow well done guys that's great!
looks like i'm the one in three my writing style is the definition of what she hates as well - long complex sentences and a max of two paragraphs a page. i'm going to be crushed. apparently quite a few d students either failed or scraped passes because she didn't like their writing style. did u guys make any grammatical errors?

 

[MaryJane]

Congrats IWR!! See, I told you you'd do fine

Whoever marked my essay didnt like my footnotes either (marker was "np"??), despite the fact I've always received full marks every other year for doing it the same way

Scarecrow, from what I can tell from the comments, I didnt make any grammatical errors, but that isnt to say there arent any. Basically, the only comments I had written on mine concerned the footnotes and the fact that I didnt comment on the aboriginal v peasant economies enough for their liking. Bastards!

I'm sure you'll do fine, sweetie

Not looking forward to receiving the problem question (which I'll have to grab on Thursday because I'm not in the lecture). Also, just so you guys know;

Nicole wrote the essay for the exam
Sandy did the case note
Shayne did the hypothetical.

And, they will only be answering questions in the lecture - not before and not after it. So, if you have any questions, either email them, or bring it up on the day.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

83!!!!!
woot!!!
everything is wonderful. u guys are great. so is my lamp. and that leaf. what a beautiful wonderful world. la la la, la la la
yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[iwannarock]

well done! thats awesome

HA!

the 3 of us proved the law of probability wrong yet again!

now back to my 3000 word world music essay due 2morow.

 

[scarecrow_of_oz]

good luck with it honey
how's it going?

side eek: prob q tomorrow!!

 

[MaryJane]

Okay, I'll start the ball rolling... Which questions are you guys doing for const?

I'm doing question 1 (Aliens and naturalisation) and question 4 (terrorism).

I really have to get these finished asap because I'm working on Tuesday It sucks to lose a day, but at least it will be over quicker!

I've had 1 call and 2 emails from people asking how I'm approaching question 1 (seeing question 4 seems to almost be a replication from the tutorial problem).