OTAGO PTY LTD and CITY OF COCKBURN

Otago Pty Ltd and City of Cockburn brought a case before the court regarding the injurious effect of land reservation on Otago's property, as per the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA). The dispute centred on whether the land had been injuriously affected by its reservation under a structure plan, which was later incorporated into the town planning scheme. The parties also debated whether this reservation conferred a vested but deferred right to compensation, and whether the Town Planning Appeal Tribunal had the jurisdiction to determine such matters. The court was required to decide on the interpretation and application of several legislative provisions, including sections 176(1), 177, and 178 of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA), and section 37 of the Interpretation Act 1984 (WA).

The court examined the statutory framework and case law to determine the proper interpretation of the term 'the land is first sold' in section 177(1)(a) of the Planning and Development Act 2005 (WA). The court held that this phrase refers to the date of actual conveyance of the land from the owner to the purchaser, at which point the purchase price is paid. The court also considered the principles of injurious affection and compensation under the Act, noting that compensation for injurious affection is payable only once unless further injurious affection arises from an alteration of the existing reservation or the imposition of another reservation. The court clarified that compensation is payable to the owner of the land at the date of the reservation or the date of the application for planning approval, depending on the circumstances. The court further examined the time limits for making claims for compensation under the Act.

In conclusion, the court found that the reservation of land under the structure plan did not confer a vested but deferred right to compensation and that the Town Planning Appeal Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to determine such matters. The court further found that the reservation of the land for a public purpose did not injuriously affect Otago's property, and therefore, no compensation was payable. The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Town Planning Appeal Tribunal.