COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ‑ claim for compensation ‑ resumption of leasehold interest ‑ 18 advertising billboards owned by claimant ‑ billboards located on road between international and domestic terminals at Sydney Airport ‑ compensation claim for hypothetical digitisation of signs prior to date of acquisition ‑ no legal basis for a claim ‑ if wrong, contingent determination of number of signs which might have been digitised ‑ two signs would have been digitised
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ‑ method to be used for calculating value of leasehold interest ‑ discounted cashflow method appropriate basis of calculation ‑ determination of input factors for such calculation
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ‑ claim for “Digital advantage” ‑ “Digital advantage” claim separate from “Halo effect” claim ‑ no proper evidentiary basis for “Digital advantage” advantage claim ‑ claim rejected
COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ‑ claim for “Halo effect” ‑ “Halo effect” said to arise because of claimant's ability to market billboards in combination at multiple airport locations in other cities ‑ no proper evidentiary basis for claim ‑ claim mere assertion ‑ claim rejected
Case Details
Citation[2023] NSWLEC 26
CourtNSWLEC
JurisdictionNew South Wales
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
