案例库 | LegalLink

COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ‑ substratum compulsorily acquired for the purpose of construction of a railway tunnel for the Sydney Metro project ‑ claim for compensation for market value of the substratum and for the decrease in value of the residual land retained by the dispossessed owner ‑ three jurisdictional tests as prerequisites to being permitted to seek compensation pursuant to the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991(the Just Terms Act) set by Sch 6B of the Transport Administration Act 1988 (the Transport Administration Act) ‑ first test is whether “the surface of the overlying soil is disturbed” ‑ geotechnical evidence establishes test is satisfied ‑ alternative tests not satisfied ‑ ability to claim compensation pursuant to the Just Terms Act establishedMARKET VALUE CLAIM ‑ Applicant’s valuer assesses market value of acquired substratum on the basis of “blot on title” ‑ Respondent’s valuer assesses market value of acquired substratum as nil ‑ “blot on title” not an appropriate approach ‑ statutory requirement to consider a hypothetical transaction involving a willing, but not anxious, purchaser and a willing, but not anxious, vendor ‑ hypothetical vendor would not altruistically ascribe no value to the substratum ‑ only valuation evidence of appropriate compensation of $20,000 proposed by the Applicant's valuer ‑ appropriate to award the Applicant compensation for acquisition of the substratum in the quantum proposed by its valuerCLAIM FOR COMPENSATION FOR IMPACT ON RESIDUE LAND ‑ town planning evidence of increased development potential of the site ‑ consideration of how increase in development potential was caused ‑ increased development potential caused by the public purpose ‑ dispute as to cost of additional geotechnical monitoring to permit realisation of future development potential arising from the public purpose ‑ cost of additional monitoring to realise increased development potential determined as $140,000 ‑ valuers disagree about value of increased development potential ‑ Applicant's valuer says no increase in value to be ascribed ‑ Respondent’s valuer proposes 10% uplift in value for future development potential ‑ Respondent’s valuer’s position preferred ‑ increase in value of residue land significantly greater than the cost of the necessary geotechnical monitoring ‑ no entitlement to compensation pursuant to s 55(f) of the Just Terms Act ‑ claim for compensation for decrease in value of residue land dismissed

《悉尼地铁项目:强制征收引发的赔偿之争，土地价值评估悬而未决》

2022-11-23 MOORE

请参考第236条法官命令。

ClarkeKann Lawyers

Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, ss 3, 54‑56, 59 and 62

查看案例摘要

真实澳大利亚案例法

铁路隧道强征争议:补偿索赔案中法庭的精彩对决与费用判决！

大额赔偿与诉讼费用:法庭裁决揭示‘卡尔德班克’提议的深层真相

《澳大利亚法院宣判:司法公正优先，首被告获准披露新证据！》

《金融风波:贷款经纪人未能兑现承诺，开发商梦碎千万融资》

《地底风云:澳大利亚地下隧道工程引发的土壤沉降与补偿之争》

《悉尼地铁项目:强制征收引发的赔偿之争，土地价值评估悬而未决》

《悉尼地铁征地纠纷:公司挑战传票与索取文件，费用裁决引发新争议》

《澳大利亚土地征收案:法院裁定调整传票范围，确保文档相关性和时间限制！》

《邻居纷争:草坪吹风机引发的道路权利之争》

真实 澳大利亚案例法

真实澳大利亚案例法