Solak v Registrar of Titles

In Solak v Registrar of Titles, the plaintiff sought to amend his defence and third party claim in a proceeding that originally concerned a fraudulent mortgage. The court was required to determine whether the Registrar of Titles could be precluded from seeking a declaration concerning a subject matter already determined between the parties to the original proceeding, and whether the proposed amendments were sufficiently particularized and disclosed a valid cause of action. The proposed amendments were opposed on the grounds of res judicata and failure to disclose a cause of action. The court considered whether the allegation of fraud based on “reckless indifference” was bad in law, and whether the allegation of “legal responsibility” for the purposes of s 109(3)(a) of the Transfer of Land Act 1958 was sufficiently particularized. The court also considered whether the allegation that a duty of care existed by virtue of the plaintiff’s vulnerability as the registered proprietor of the land was bad in law.

The court held that the Registrar of Titles was not precluded from seeking a declaration concerning a subject matter already determined between the parties to the original proceeding, as the Registrar of Titles was not a party to the original proceeding. The court also held that the proposed amendments were not bad in law, as the allegation of fraud based on “reckless indifference” was sufficiently particularized, and the allegation of “legal responsibility” for the purposes of s 109(3)(a) of the Transfer of Land Act 1958 was not bad in law. The court held that the allegation that a duty of care existed by virtue of the plaintiff’s vulnerability as the registered proprietor of the land was not bad in law, but was not sufficiently particularized.

The court dismissed the plaintiff’s application for leave to amend the defence and third party claim, and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendants’ costs of the application.