Greenwells Wollert Pty Ltd v Head, Transport for Victoria

The applicant, Greenwells Wollert, sought compensation from the Transport for Victoria for the reservation of 0.85 hectares of land designated for road widening. The application was dismissed by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). The primary legal issue was whether the applicant had standing to bring a claim for compensation under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicant had standing despite the vendor of the land previously having had a right to claim compensation, and whether any financial loss suffered by the applicant was a natural, direct and reasonable consequence of the land's reservation.

The VCAT held that the applicant did not have standing to bring a claim for compensation. The court reasoned that the financial loss suffered by the applicant was not a natural, direct and reasonable consequence of the reservation of the land. The applicant had purchased the land after the reservation had occurred, and therefore, the applicant's financial loss was not a direct result of the reservation. Furthermore, the court found that the vendor had already claimed compensation for the reservation, and therefore, the applicant had no standing to bring a claim for the same reservation. The VCAT concluded that the applicant's financial loss was not a direct and reasonable consequence of the reservation of the land, and therefore, the application for compensation was dismissed.

In light of the findings, the VCAT did not make any orders for compensation. The decision highlights the importance of establishing standing and the directness and reasonableness of the financial loss in compensation claims under the Planning and Environment Act 1987.