ELECTRICITY NETWORKS CORPORATION T/AS WESTERN POWER and BOMBARA

The case involves the Electricity Networks Corporation trading as Western Power (Western Power) and Bombara, a property owner along the route of a 300,000 volt power transmission line from Muja to Kwinana. The dispute centres on the date of first entry for the purposes of assessing compensation for the acquisition of an easement for the power line. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The central legal issues in the case were the determination of the relevant date for assessing compensation, and the extent of the statutory authority to enter onto land and acquire an easement. The court was required to consider the changes to the legislative scheme during the period of entry and the date of formal taking, and whether any accrued rights were relevant. The court also needed to decide whether the Supreme Court or the State Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the claims, and whether the entry onto the land had been 'unauthorised'. Additionally, the court had to consider the extent of the savings and transitional provisions and whether the Parliament had altered the right to receive compensation determined by an independent adjudicative body.

The court found that the State Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the matter but not to entertain collateral attack arguments. The court interpreted the statutory powers given to Western Power and found that no relevant accrued rights existed. The court held that the Parliament had not altered the right to receive compensation determined by an independent adjudicative body, but had changed the date and event for determining the date of first entry. The changes were made to bring about consistency between related legislation authorising entry onto and the acquisition of land. The court determined the date of first entry to be on or about 6 January 1995, which was when Western Power began installing gates on the property.

The court's final orders were that the State Administrative Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the matter, but not to entertain collateral attack arguments. The court held that the relevant date for assessing compensation was on or about 6 January 1995, and that no accrued rights were relevant. The court also found that the Parliament had not altered the right to receive compensation determined by an independent adjudicative body, but had changed the date and event for determining the date of first entry.