The Court held that a mortgagee's entitlement to compensation under the Just Terms Act is not capped by the landowner's deemed acceptance of the statutory offer under s 45; each interest holder has an independent right to claim and appeal under ss 37, 39 and 66, and s 65 does not impose a financial ceiling binding the mortgagee to the landowner's inaction. On the s 56(1)(a) disregard, the Court held that a privately constructed detention basin built by the landowner's voluntary choice could not be disregarded as caused by the public purpose, even where Council planning instruments had long earmarked the site for public drainage infrastructure, applying Drivas and Noubia CA. On valuation of underlying R1 zoned land, the Court found that a hypothetical purchaser would not assume residential zoning in the NE corner due to flood risk and riparian corridor constraints measured from top of bank, but would assume 4,106.4m² of R1 land in the SE corner was developable, with the question of whether a replacement detention basin was required left partially unresolved for further submissions.
The full text is available to signed-in members.