Boxall v Sly

The High Court of Australia considered a dispute between Boxall and Sly concerning the resumption of land for closer settlement under the *Closer Settlement (Amendment) Act 1909* (NSW). The notification of intention to resume was made under section 4 of the *Closer Settlement Act 1907* (NSW).

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the value of the land, for the purposes of compensation upon resumption, should include any increase in value attributable to the anticipated construction of a railway. The Court was required to interpret the provisions of the *Closer Settlement (Amendment) Act 1909* and its interaction with the powers of resumption granted under section 5 of that Act, particularly in relation to the landowner's right of disposition and the method of valuation.

The Court reasoned that the *Closer Settlement (Amendment) Act 1909* did not alter the fundamental principle that compensation for resumed land should reflect its value at the date of resumption. Crucially, the Court held that any added value to the land that would accrue from the construction of the railway, which was sanctioned by a separate Act, should not be included in the valuation for the purpose of compensation. This principle was applied to ensure that the landowner was not compensated for an increase in value that was a direct consequence of the government's public works project, rather than an inherent characteristic of the land itself.