McKay v Commissioner of Main Roads

[2013] WASCA 135

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Resumption and Acquisition of Land
2. › Compensation
3. › Valuation of land
4. › Comparable sales method
5. › Adjustment of comparable sales
6. › Whether judge acted as 'third valuer'
7. › Whether judge undertook valuation without recognised methodology
8. › Procedural fairness
9. › Whether witnesses had proper opportunity to deal with judge's approach
10. › Land Administration Act 1997 (WA), ss 202, 241
1. Resumption and Acquisition of Land
2. › Compensation
3. › Planning
4. › Past hypothetical rezoning
5. › Whether land would have been rezoned but for proposed public works
6. › Whether judge should have accepted expert planning evidence
7. › Land Administration Act 1997 (WA), s 241(2)
1. Appeal
2. › New trial
3. › Scope of retrial
4. › Whether new trial should be limited to certain issues
5. › Whether matter should be remitted to a different judge
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Discovery
3. › Application for new trial on basis of failure to comply with discovery obligations
4. › Application to admit additional evidence on appeal

Quick Take

A trial judge in a compulsory acquisition case who identifies that adjustments to comparable sales are necessary but no expert has addressed the quantum of adjustment must afford the parties an opportunity to adduce evidence on that issue before making the adjustment. The judge cannot simply make the adjustment based on guesswork without giving the parties notice and an opportunity to respond. Where a limited retrial is ordered on valuation adjustment issues, remitter to the same judge is appropriate where the judge's familiarity with the extensive anterior findings is an advantage and there is no suggestion of apprehended bias.