Once s 196 of the Property Law Act 1974 (Qld) is engaged by improvements made under a genuine but mistaken belief as to ownership, the court's jurisdiction under s 197 remains exercisable in respect of all improvements, including those made after the mistake is discovered, though the absence of mistake for later work is relevant to the nature of relief. There is no operative mistake within s 196 where work is performed for a person known to hold only a purchaser's interest under an uncompleted contract of sale. For corporate applicants, the relevant state of mind is that of the person who decided to undertake the work, not merely an employee who signed the contract. A genuine but mistaken belief need not be reasonable; negligence does not preclude the engagement of s 196.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.