Pajares v State of Queensland

Case

[2004] QLAC 61

20 July 2004


LAND APPEAL COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Pajares v State of Queensland  [2004] QLAC 0061
PARTIES: Luis James Pajares
(applicant)
v.
The State
(respondent)
FILE NO: LAC2003/0741
DIVISION: Land Appeal Court of Queensland
PROCEEDING: Appeal for Costs
ORIGINATING COURT: Land Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON: 20 July 2004
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARD AT: Cairns

JUDGE

MEMBERS

Justice Jones

Mr RE Wenck
Mr RP Scott

ORDER: Appeal dismissed
  1. The claimant appeals against the order that he be paid 50 per cent of his costs to be assessed on the standard basis seeking in lieu the full amount of costs to be paid on an indemnity basis. 

  2. The State contended that the allowance of 50 per cent of assessed costs to the claimant was beyond the proper exercise of the Land Court’s discretion pointing to the number of issues in which the State was successful and the amount of time the court was engaged on the issues in which the claimant was unsuccessful.  The State has submitted that the proper order for costs should have been limited to 25 per cent of the assessed costs.

  1. Section 27(2) of the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 provides:-

    “(2)  If the amount of compensation as determined is the amount finally claimed by the claimant in the proceedings or is nearer to that amount than to the amount of the valuation finally put in evidence by the constructing authority, costs (if any) shall be awarded to the claimant, otherwise costs (if any) shall be awarded to the constructing authority.”

  2. The mid point for the purpose of sub section (2) between the amount of the claim and the amount of the State’s offer is $3,690,277.87.  The revised determination is closer to the State’s offer by the sum of $270,588.87 with the consequence that the costs order made below cannot stand and the claimant’s appeal against that order must be dismissed. 

JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT

MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT

MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0