Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd v Ausgrid - [2016] NSWLEC 75

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd v Ausgrid [2016] NSWLEC 75
Hearing dates: 14-18 March 2016, 6-8 April 2016, 11-12 April 2016
Date of orders: 17 June 2016
Decision date: 17 June 2016
Jurisdiction: Class 3
Before: Pain J
Decision:
(1) The compensation payable to Bligh under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 is determined at $682,000
(2) Exhibits may be returned
(3) The question of costs is reserved

Catchwords: COMPENSATION – compulsory acquisition of three easements to enable building of substation on neighbouring land – identification of public purpose –before and after calculation of market value to determine injurious affection – no loss established in after scenario – compensation payable for easements
Legislation Cited: Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000 (NSW)
Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), s 88K
Electricity Supply Act 1995 (NSW)
Energy Services Corporations Act 1995 (NSW), ss 7, 9
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 75J, 75O, 75W
Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 40
Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 39, 54, 55, 56, 59, 62
Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Besmaw Pty Ltd v Sydney Water Corporation [2001] NSWLEC 15; (2001) 113 LGERA 246
Chaudry v Liverpool City Council [2008] NSWLEC 251
Chino Pty Ltd v Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation [2006] NSWLEC 768; (2006) 153 LGERA 136
Commissioner of Succession Duties (South Australia) v Executor Trustee and Agency Company of South Australia Ltd [1947] HCA 10; (1947) 74 CLR 358
Davies v Sydney Water Corporation [2012] NSWLEC 130
Housing Commission (NSW) v Falconer [1981] 1 NSWLR 547; (1981) 50 LGRA 334
Marshall v Director-General, Department of Transport [2001] HCA 37; (2001) 205 CLR 603
MMTR Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWLEC 177
Pennant Hills Golf Club Ltd v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) [1999] NSWCA 110; (1999) 9 BPR 17,011
Roads and Maritime Services v Allandale Blue Metal Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 7; (2006) 212 LGERA 307
Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v Peak [2007] NSWCA 66
Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v Perry [2001] NSWCA 251; (2001) 52 NSWLR 222
Sydney Water Corporation v Caruso [2009] NSWCA 391; (2009) 170 LGERA 298
Vilro Pty Ltd v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) [2010] NSWLEC 234; (2010) 179 LGERA 47
Walker Corporation Pty Ltd v Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority [2008] HCA 5; (2008) 233 CLR 259
Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd (in liq) v Darling Harbour Authority (1991) 24 NSWLR 156; 73 LGRA 47
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Ausgrid (Respondent)
Representation:
COUNSEL:
Mr P Clay SC and Ms J McKelvey (Applicant)
Mr I Hemmings SC and Mr C Norton (Respondent)
SOLICITORS:
Speed and Stracey Lawyers (Applicant)
Maddocks (Respondent)

File Number(s): 16/165214

Judgment

Compensation payable following compulsory acquisition

The Respondent Ausgrid compulsorily acquired the following interests in 31 Bligh Street Sydney (the land)…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd v Ausgrid and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] NSWLEC 75
Decision Date: 17 June 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd, the plaintiff, sought compensation from Ausgrid, the defendant, under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 for land that was acquired for public purposes. The dispute arose from the valuation and compensation for the land taken, with Bligh asserting that the compensation offered was inadequate. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the compensation offered by Ausgrid was just and, if not, what amount should be awarded. The court had to consider the statutory criteria for determining just terms compensation and the evidence provided by both parties regarding the value of the land. This included assessing the market value of the land, any additional costs incurred by Bligh as a result of the acquisition, and the impact on Bligh's business operations.

The court found that the compensation offered by Ausgrid did not meet the statutory requirements for just terms compensation. It considered the evidence of experts on both sides and concluded that the proper compensation should reflect the market value of the land and any consequential losses. After evaluating the submissions and evidence, the court determined that the fair compensation payable to Bligh was $682,000. The court also allowed the exhibits to be returned and reserved the question of costs for another day.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The compensation payable to Bligh under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 is determined at $682,000

(2) Exhibits may be returned

(3) The question of costs is reserved

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd v Ausgrid [2016] NSWLEC 75
Hearing dates:	14-18 March 2016, 6-8 April 2016, 11-12 April 2016
Date of orders:	17 June 2016
Decision date:	17 June 2016
Jurisdiction:	Class 3
Before:	Pain J
Decision:	(1) The compensation payable to Bligh under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 is determined at $682,000 (2) Exhibits may be returned (3) The question of costs is reserved
Catchwords:	COMPENSATION – compulsory acquisition of three easements to enable building of substation on neighbouring land – identification of public purpose –before and after calculation of market value to determine injurious affection – no loss established in after scenario – compensation payable for easements
Legislation Cited:	Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000 (NSW) Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), s 88K Electricity Supply Act 1995 (NSW) Energy Services Corporations Act 1995 (NSW), ss 7, 9 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW), ss 75J, 75O, 75W Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), s 40 Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 39, 54, 55, 56, 59, 62 Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Besmaw Pty Ltd v Sydney Water Corporation [2001] NSWLEC 15; (2001) 113 LGERA 246 Chaudry v Liverpool City Council [2008] NSWLEC 251 Chino Pty Ltd v Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation [2006] NSWLEC 768; (2006) 153 LGERA 136 Commissioner of Succession Duties (South Australia) v Executor Trustee and Agency Company of South Australia Ltd [1947] HCA 10; (1947) 74 CLR 358 Davies v Sydney Water Corporation [2012] NSWLEC 130 Housing Commission (NSW) v Falconer [1981] 1 NSWLR 547; (1981) 50 LGRA 334 Marshall v Director-General, Department of Transport [2001] HCA 37; (2001) 205 CLR 603 MMTR Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWLEC 177 Pennant Hills Golf Club Ltd v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) [1999] NSWCA 110; (1999) 9 BPR 17,011 Roads and Maritime Services v Allandale Blue Metal Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCA 7; (2006) 212 LGERA 307 Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v Peak [2007] NSWCA 66 Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v Perry [2001] NSWCA 251; (2001) 52 NSWLR 222 Sydney Water Corporation v Caruso [2009] NSWCA 391; (2009) 170 LGERA 298 Vilro Pty Ltd v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) [2010] NSWLEC 234; (2010) 179 LGERA 47 Walker Corporation Pty Ltd v Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority [2008] HCA 5; (2008) 233 CLR 259 Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd (in liq) v Darling Harbour Authority (1991) 24 NSWLR 156; 73 LGRA 47
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Bligh Consulting Pty Ltd (Applicant) Ausgrid (Respondent)
Representation:	COUNSEL: Mr P Clay SC and Ms J McKelvey (Applicant) Mr I Hemmings SC and Mr C Norton (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Speed and Stracey Lawyers (Applicant) Maddocks (Respondent)
File Number(s):	16/165214