31:
179:
ruled that due to amongst other things, the great speed of the sale (less than 24 hours after listing), that it was sold for only 63% of the market price, and the transaction was stamped and registered the very day after settlement, that the purchaser was aware of the wife's equitable interest in the
151:
Not happy with these developments, on the following day 22 April, the husband showed the injunction to a Mr
Petrovic, a real estate agent, and instructed him to sell the house, and the agent arranged a sale of the house for $ 5,000, substantially below its valuation of $ 8,000, the same day, with the
180:
property (albeit unregistered) and that the sale was registered through fraud, that accordingly, the purchaser did not have indefeasible title and the sale was set aside. However the court vacated the wife's previous award of damages for $ 3,000 and awarded her legal costs of only $ 300.
159:
Mrs
Glantschnig was then forced to file a motion for the purchase to be set aside, and also added her ex-husband and the real estate agent Mr Petrovic, who was aware of the scheme to defraud, to the proceedings.
155:
Even then, the purchaser settled the sale the following day, on 23 April, which was legally two days early than required, and the title transfer was done first thing the following day at 9.30am on 24 April.
132:
However, despite her paying half the deposit, only the husband was listed on the property title as the registered owner. However, this still gave her an equitable ownership to the property.
138:
In 1968 the wife lent the husband $ 1,000 for a trip back to
Austria for what has been described as an indefinite stay. In his absence, the wife took in a boarder, only referred to as "K".
135:
In 1958 the couple briefly separated, and the husband agreed to a settlement agreement in which he acknowledged he owed his wife half the deposit for the house. The couple soon reconciled.
144:
In the ensuing argument, the wife walked out of the house, taking their two children with her. The following day, 21 April, the wife obtained, and had served on her husband, an interim
141:
When the husband finally returned to his wife unexpectedly on 20 April, he discovered that his wife and the boarder "K" were living together in a marriage-like relationship.
236:
121:
in 1955, they later moved to New
Zealand in 1956. In that same year they purchased their matrimonial house at 62 Wallace Street,
251:
206:
241:
176:
41:
102:
106:) the purchaser of the land was aware of the title fraud at the time of the purchase of the property.
246:
164:
91:
8:
126:
202:
96:
30:
230:
220:
Gerbic & Lawrence, "Understanding
Commercial Law", LexisNexis, 2003
145:
122:
118:
114:
Mr H and Mrs
Christine Glantschnig had a turbulent relationship.
90:(1972) is an often cited New Zealand case to the limits of
152:
settlement date being only three days later on 25 April.
129:
3,900, with the wife paying half the deposit of $ 1,000.
52:
Efstratiou, Glantschnig, and
Petrovic v. Glantschnig
190:
94:to land ownership, where in this case, (unlike in
228:
196:
148:prohibiting him from returning to the house.
163:The purchaser, Mr Efstratiou claimed he had
197:Gerbic, Philippa; Lawrence, Martin (2003).
29:
229:
237:Court of Appeal of New Zealand cases
13:
14:
263:
177:Court of Appeal of New Zealand
42:Court of Appeal of New Zealand
1:
252:New Zealand contract case law
183:
109:
201:(5th ed.). LexisNexis.
199:Understanding Commercial Law
7:
16:1972 New Zealand legal case
10:
268:
103:Boyd v Mayor of Wellington
79:indefeasible title, fraud
78:
73:
65:
57:
47:
37:
28:
23:
92:indefeasibility of title
87:Efstratiou v Glantschnig
24:Efstratiou v Glantschnig
242:1972 in New Zealand law
170:
117:Originally married in
165:indefeasible title
83:
82:
259:
247:1972 in case law
213:
212:
194:
33:
21:
20:
267:
266:
262:
261:
260:
258:
257:
256:
227:
226:
217:
216:
209:
195:
191:
186:
173:
125:for the sum of
112:
97:Frazer v Walker
17:
12:
11:
5:
265:
255:
254:
249:
244:
239:
225:
224:
221:
215:
214:
207:
188:
187:
185:
182:
172:
169:
111:
108:
81:
80:
76:
75:
71:
70:
67:
63:
62:
59:
55:
54:
49:
48:Full case name
45:
44:
39:
35:
34:
26:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
264:
253:
250:
248:
245:
243:
240:
238:
235:
234:
232:
222:
219:
218:
210:
208:0-408-71714-9
204:
200:
193:
189:
181:
178:
168:
166:
161:
157:
153:
149:
147:
142:
139:
136:
133:
130:
128:
124:
120:
115:
107:
105:
104:
99:
98:
93:
89:
88:
77:
72:
68:
64:
60:
56:
53:
50:
46:
43:
40:
36:
32:
27:
22:
19:
198:
192:
174:
162:
158:
154:
150:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
116:
113:
101:
95:
86:
85:
84:
51:
18:
231:Categories
184:References
146:injunction
123:Wellington
110:Background
223:NZLR 594
74:Keywords
69:NZLR 594
66:Citation
119:Austria
58:Decided
205:
38:Court
203:ISBN
175:The
171:Held
100:and
61:1972
233::
167:.
127:$
211:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
