Chief Commissioner for Railways and Tramways (NSW) v Attorney-General for New South Wales

The Chief Commissioner for Railways and Tramways (NSW) was the respondent in proceedings brought by the Attorney-General for New South Wales concerning the resumption of a public highway. The dispute centred on the liability of the Chief Commissioner, as the constructing authority, to provide a substituted road under the *Public Roads Act 1902* (NSW) when the entirety of the existing Sydney Road had been included within the resumed area. The case was heard by the Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Chief Commissioner was obligated to construct a substituted road under section 21 of the *Public Roads Act 1902* when the original road was entirely resumed, or if the obligation only arose when a portion of the road was resumed. The Court was required to interpret the scope and application of sections 19 and 21 of the Act in the context of a complete resumption of a public highway.

The Court reasoned that the language of section 21, which refers to the constructing authority making "a substituted road in lieu of the road so resumed," did not inherently exclude the situation where the entire road was resumed. The purpose of the section was to ensure that the public retained access, and this purpose was equally served whether a part or the whole of the road was resumed. The Court found that the Chief Commissioner's obligation to provide a substituted road arose irrespective of whether the resumption affected a portion or the entirety of the existing road. The Court therefore held that the Chief Commissioner was liable to provide a substituted road.