Minister for Army v Parbury Henty & Co Pty Ltd

The High Court of Australia considered appeals from the Supreme Court of New South Wales concerning compensation for property acquired by the Minister of State for the Army under the National Security (General) Regulations. The primary dispute involved the assessment of compensation payable to companies dispossessed of their premises, with the Minister arguing for a narrower calculation of loss than that awarded by the Compensation Board and subsequently the Full Court of the Supreme Court.

The legal issues before the High Court were twofold: first, the principles governing the assessment of compensation for property acquired under the National Security (General) Regulations, specifically whether compensation was limited to actual pecuniary loss or extended to the value to the dispossessed party; and second, the jurisdiction of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales to hear appeals from decisions made by a single judge of that court reviewing compensation assessments under the Regulations, particularly in light of section 39(2)(a) of the Judiciary Act 1903-1940.

The Court held that a person dispossessed under regulation 54 of the National Security (General) Regulations is entitled to the value to them of the thing taken, not merely their actual pecuniary loss. Regarding jurisdiction, the Court determined that an appeal lies to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales from a single judge's review of compensation under regulation 60G(5). This was based on the reasoning that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court was conferred by the Regulations themselves, not solely by the Judiciary Act, and that the Regulations provided for such appeals. Furthermore, even if the Judiciary Act were considered to confer jurisdiction, section 39(2)(a) was held not to prevent appeals from a single judge to the Full Court in cases of federal jurisdiction.

The High Court affirmed the decisions of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in the cases of *Parbury Henty & Co. Pty. Ltd. v. Minister of State for the Army* and *Carrier Air Conditioning Ltd. v. Minister of State for the Army*, thereby upholding the compensation awarded in those matters. However, the Court reversed the decision in *Brickworks Ltd. v. Minister of State for the Army*, indicating a different outcome for that specific claim.