The appeal court ordered discharge of a caveat in Laba et al. v. 4027183 Manitoba Ltd. et al., 2014 MBCA 107, finding that it was not open to the motion judge to uphold the caveat on a basis not set out in the caveat itself. Manitoba law is clear, said the court, that if "a claimant has no interest in the land, the caveat cannot be sustained." Given the motion judge's finding that no agreement existed between the parties, the requisite interest in land had not been demonstrated.

.