Skip to Main Content
Prepared for Unknown User by ICLR
The Law Reports (Chancery Division)
[1977] Ch 106
[CHANCERY DIVISION]
TITO AND OTHERS
v.
WADDELL AND OTHERS (No. 2)
[1973 R. No. 2013]
TITO AND OTHERS
v.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL
[1971 R. No. 3670]
1975 April 8– 11, 14– 18, 21– 25, 28– 30;
May 1, 2, 5– 8, 12– 16, 19– 23;
June 3– 5, 9– 13, 16– 20, 23– 27, 30;
July 1– 4, 7– 11, 14– 18, 21– 25, 28– 31;
Oct. 22– 24, 27– 31;
Nov. 3– 7, 10– 14, 17– 20, 24– 28;
Dec. 1– 5;
1975 Dec. 15– 19;
1976 Jan. 12– 16, 19– 23, 26– 30;
Feb. 2– 6, 9– 13, 20, 23– 27;
March 1– 5, 8– 12, 15, 18, 19, 22– 26, 29– 31;
April 1, 2, 5– 9, 13, 14, 27– 30;
May 3– 7, 10– 14, 17– 21, 24– 28;
June 8– 11, 14– 18;
1976 Nov. 29, 30;
Dec. 1– 3
1977 May 19;
July 28; 29
Megarry V.-C.
Trusts — Nature of trust — Crown — Colonial official acting under local legislation in name of Crown — Compensation and royalties to be held on “trust” for natives — “Trusts in higher sense” and “trusts in lower sense” — Whether enforceable trust or governmental obligation — Whether Crown trustee
107
Crown — Colony — Trusts — Phosphate island — Compulsory acquisition of land for mining under colonial legislation in name of Crown — Lease by colonial official to mining commissioners — Royalties to be held “in trust” for islanders — Funds applicable f or benefit of island community and landowners — Whether fiduciary obligation on Crown — Whether indivisibility of Crown imposing liability for colonial government's obligation — Applicability of limitation period or doctrine of laches — Whether bar to proceedings against Crown — Whether conflict of interest and duty — Whether breaches of self-dealing or fairdealings rules — Mining Ordinance 1928 (Gilbert and Ellice Islands Ordinances No. 4 of 1928), ss. 6, 7 — Limitation Act 1939 (2 & 3 Geo. 6, c. 21), s. 2 (2) (7) — Crown Proceedings Act 1947 (10 & 11 Geo. 6, c. 44), s. 40 (2)
Mines — Mining lease — Construction — Removal of sand and shingle from “beach” of Pacific island — Extent of beach — Jurisdiction of English court in relation to foreign land
Mines — Mining lease — Construction — Right to extract phosphates from Pacific island — Obligation to “replant” with trees and shrubs — Prescription by resident commissioner — Mining undertaking passing to mining commissioners — Abolition of office of resident commissioner — Appointment of governor — Extent of obligation to replant — Whether prescription of trees enforceable obligation — Whether condition precedent — Whether mining commissioners liable under doctrine of novation — Whether liable under doctrine of benefit and burden — Appropriate remedy — Damages
Contract — Benefit and burden — Pure or conditional doctrine — Mining leases with replanting obligation — Government appointees taking benefits — Changes of appointees — Whether present appointees liable on obligation to replant — Whether obligation running with land — Whether in law as well as equity
Specific Performance — Obligation to replant — Suitability of remedy — Phosphate mining on island — Obligation to replant with trees and shrubs prescribed by colonial official — Whether prescription contractual or governmental obligation — Whether court able to prescribe — Difficulty of supervision — Need for concurrence of all parties — Whether damages more suitable
Damages — Contract — Breach — Obligation to replant devastated land — Measure of damages — Diminution in value of land or cost of replanting
Costs — Settlement offer — Non-acceptance — Costs incurred before and after offer — Almost equal — Effect of offer — R.S.C., Ord. 22, r. 3
This content is available only to subscribers. If you have a subscription to this content, please log in.
If not, you can subscribe online, request a free trial, or contact ICLR by email at enquiries@iclr.co.uk or on +44 (0) 207 242 6471 to discuss further options.
JOHs should sign in via eLIS.

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies