Apokis v Transport for NSW

1 NSWLR 547; [2020] NSWCA 39

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Valuation
2. › Compulsory acquisition of land
3. › Assessment of compensation
4. › Market value
5. › Role of judicial valuer
6. › Valuation of non-marketable parcel
7. › Before and after assessment
8. › Whether primary judge mistook function in assessing market value
9. › Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), s 56(1)
1. Valuation
2. › Compulsory acquisition of land
3. › Assessment of compensation
4. › Disturbance
5. › Loss attributable to disturbance
6. › Whether claimed disturbance related to actual use of acquired land
7. › Whether resource value attributable to public purpose could be claimed as disturbance
8. › Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), ss 55(d), 59(1)(f)
1. Valuation
2. › Compulsory acquisition of land
3. › Assessment of compensation
4. › Market value
5. › Pointe Gourde principle
6. › Disregarding increase in value caused by carrying out of public purpose
7. › Whether resource had value absent the public purpose
8. › Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), s 56(1)(a)
1. Appeal
2. › Civil
3. › Extension of time to appeal
4. › Notice of appeal filed almost two years late
5. › Government respondent consenting to late filing
6. › Relevance of model litigant policy
7. › Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 57

Quick Take

Practitioners acting for landowners in compulsory acquisition matters cannot claim the value of resources on acquired land as disturbance under s 59(1)(f) where that value only arose because of the public purpose for which the land was acquired, as this would circumvent the disregard required by s 56(1)(a).