Registrar of Titles v Spencer

The Registrar of Titles appealed from a decision of the Full Court of Western Australia concerning the measure of damages recoverable under section 207 of the Transfer of Land Act 1893. The dispute arose from the wrongful issue of a certificate of title in fee simple to a purchaser from a tenant for life, which deprived the remainderman (the respondent) of his interest in the land. The core issue was whether the value of trade fixtures, installed on the land by those deriving title from the wrongful certificate holder, should be included in the damages awarded to the remainderman.

The High Court was required to determine the correct measure of damages under section 207 of the Transfer of Land Act 1893. Specifically, the Court had to decide whether the remainderman was entitled to compensation for trade fixtures that were placed on the land after the wrongful issuance of the certificate of title, or if the damages should be limited to the value of the land and any permanent buildings thereon, as if the wrongful act had not occurred. This involved considering the legal principles governing the removability of trade fixtures as between a tenant for life and a remainderman, and how those principles applied in the context of compensation for a statutory wrong.

The Court reasoned that the purpose of section 207 was to provide full compensation for the loss actually sustained, placing the injured party in the position they would have occupied had the wrongful act not occurred, but no better. Applying this principle, the Court held that the remainderman was not entitled to the value of trade fixtures that, as between a tenant for life and a remainderman, would be removable by the executor of the tenant for life. The Court distinguished between buildings, which become part of the freehold, and trade fixtures, which may be removable. The Court found that the wrongful act deprived the remainderman of his title to the land and buildings, but not to trade fixtures that would not have passed to him had the title been correctly registered. Therefore, including the value of these fixtures would result in the remainderman profiting from the wrongful act, which was contrary to the principle of full compensation.

The appeal was allowed, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Western Australia was reversed, restoring the judgment of the trial judge. This meant that the damages awarded to the remainderman were limited to the value of the land and buildings, excluding the value of the trade fixtures.