Pavlis v Council of the City of Gold Coast
[1992] QLC 24
•24 July 1992
|
LAND COURT,
BRISBANE.
24th July, 1992.
Re: Determination of Compensation -
Resumption for Park Purposes -
A91-76
NG Pavlis
v.
Council of the City of Gold Coast
J U D G M E N T
Falling for determination is compensation following the resumption by the respondent Council of the City of Gold Coast for park purposes on 25th August, 1990 of land described as Lot 42 on RP 131648, Parish of Barrow containing an area of 1.19 hectares. This land was zoned "Residential A" under the provisions of the City of Gold Coast Town Planning Scheme, and is situated on the north west corner of the intersection of Whiting and Brown Streets at Labrador. The land is encumbered with a drainage easement in favour of the Council of the City of Gold Coast being Easement E on RP 131648 containing an area of 526 m2. On 19th October, 1990, the claimant filed with the Council of the City of Gold Coast a claim for compensation in the sum of $1,500,000 together with interest on the amount of compensation from the date of gazettal of the resumption to the date of the payment of compensation. The claim for compensation was made up as follows:
Land $1,000,000
Improvement being dwelling house
erected on the said land $ 100,000
Injurious affection being loss of
capital gains tax benefits together
with increment of special value to
owner $ 300,000
Costs and valuation fees $ 100,000
Total Claim $1,500,000
======
At the outset of the hearing of the matter Counsel for the claimant sought and obtained leave to amend the claim as follows:
Land and Improvements $555,505
Injurious affection nil
Disturbance - Legal and valuation fees to
date of lodgement of claim $ 2,500
Total Claim $558,005
=====
It is to be noted that the claim for disturbance is admitted by the respondent Council so there remains only for the Court's consideration, in so far as the determination of compensation is concerned, the value of the resumed land and improvements.
Evidence was called from the claimant, Nicholas George Pavlis. Mr Pavlis told us that he purchased the property about 12 or 13 years ago when it was virtually all swamp. Since that time a lot of fill has been placed upon the land and the fill has been compacted. There were then only a few houses on the higher land in the area. As the years passed, there was a lot of development in the area and land zonings had changed, especially to "Special Residential". Many parcels were rezoned to "Residential B" and "Residential C" and from "Residential B and C" to "Commercial". Mr Pavlis did not apply for the rezoning of the subject land from "Residential A" but he thought that it clearly had potential for rezoning to "Residential B" or "Special Residential". On this basis Mr Pavlis postulates that his resumed land would have a potential to yield up to 40 home units. He expressed the opinion that as at resumption date, land in the area with potential for home unit development was selling for between $14,000 and $17,000 per unit. Mr Pavlis' attention was drawn to a dwelling house erected upon the resumed land which he says is a brick dwelling with a tiled roof. Externally it needs painting, but Mr Pavlis describes it internally as being in immaculate order.
It is practicing registered valuer James Francis Corder who values the land and improvements at $555,505. The summary of his valuation is:Subject land less house lot of 600m2 -
11,350 m2 @ $46.33/m2 $525,505
Add house and appurtenant land $130,000
$655,505
Less cost of filling $110,300
Plus cost of clearing and levelling
on housing commission land $ 10,000 $100,300
Value of acquired land and improvements $555,505
=====
Now Mr Corder describes the area in which the subject property is situated as being one which is rapidly developing as a duplex and group title area with buildings of good quality brick and tile construction with attractive landscaping. He agrees with Mr Pavlis in that the rezoning of the subject land from "Residential A" to "Residential B" could have been confidently expected.
Mr Corder describes the nature of the resumed land as being even in contour with a gentle fall from the rear boundary to the Brown Street frontage. He describes the dwelling house on the resumed land as being a spilt-level structure constructed of brick veneer, with a tiled roof, gyprock lining and timber floor. He estimates it to be about 14 years old. Mr Corder says that the building is structurally sound but required some repainting. The accommodation it provides is three bedrooms, lounge/dinning room, kitchen, study, bathroom and patio. There is a double lock-up garage, laundry, bathroom and toilet under the rear highset section.
The principal sale relied upon by Mr Corder as a basis for his valuation is that of Lot 131 on RP 7396 Parish of Barrow containing an area of 8094 m2 to the Queensland Housing Commission in June 1991 for $375,000 ($46.33/m2). I say principal sale since Mr Corder adopts a filled land value at precisely the same rate of $46.33/m2 for his valuation of the subject land. In addition Mr Corder told us that the subject land would prove to have been an ideal acquisition for the Queensland Housing Commission. This sale land is situated at 162 Whiting Street, Labrador immediately opposite the resumed land. It also has a frontage to Brown Street. He says it, like the subject land, is zoned "Residential A". Mr Corder points out that the subject land requires a capital outlay of $110,300 on filling costs for development, while the sale property only required the expenditure of $10,000 for clearing and earthworks. Mr Corder recognises that this is an after resumption date sale, but says that the market was quite static between the respective dates - he says it was "bouncing along the bottom". The Queensland Housing Commission is having 14 units constructed on the site, and Mr Corder sees the subject land as having a development potential for 25 units if the land was in the "Residential B" zone, exclusive of the appurtenant land upon which the dwelling house stands. The sale price reflects a land value of $26,785 per unit.
Mr Corder informed the Court that he has looked at a number of sales to provide him with a basis for valuing the resumed house and land at $130,000. It turns out that these sales are basically the same sales relied upon by practicing registered valuer Lloyd Sydney Parsons who valued the resumed property on behalf of the respondent Council. The sales are tabulated in Mr Parsons' tendered valuation report.
Mr Corder comments that the sale of house and land at 171 Whiting Street for $80,000 is not very comparable with the subject house and land. The house is basically a very small low set hardiplank dwelling about 90m2 in floor area. The subject house has a floor area of 130m2 in living area, 63m2 in the garage and laundry and patio of 30m2.
Mr Corder sees a property at 66 Whiting Street which sold for $115,000 as having a well maintained smaller and older house in a better location. A property at 5 Myuna Street sold for $102,000 and Mr Corder says it has upon it a very basic dwelling of about 90m2 floor area. He says it is not a larger dwelling than is the subject dwelling as suggested by Mr Parsons. Another property at 4 Millewa Street sold for $85,000. It has a dwelling with a floor area of about 90m2. It is a high set Kurts built structure. Again, a property at 11 Koonwarra Street sold for $100,000 and Mr Corder says it is improved with a smaller house in good order. He is of the opinion that this is a low priced sale. The final sale listed by Mr Parsons is at 6 Koonwarra Street which sold for $119,000. Mr Corder says the house on this property is 100 m2 in floor area and is in good condition but he sees this property as being inferior to the subject house and its appurtenant land area of 600 m2.
Mr Corder relies on other sales evidence other than the sale to the Queensland Housing Commission to support his englobo valuation of the resumed property. He refers to the sale of Lot 14 on RP 200986, Parish of Barrow containing 1.544 hectares situated at 457 Pine Ridge Road, Coombabah. This property sold to RL Hayton on 12th October, 1990 for $500,000. This site was zoned "Special Residential" and provides for 41 units. It is situated several kilometres from the subject land and has a rear frontage to the heavily trafficked Oxley Drive. The land required filling for about one-third of its area. It is further from Southport than is the subject land and is in Mr Corder's opinion less desirable mainly due to the traffic noise. The sale price indicated a value per unit of $12,195 and $32/m2. Mr Corder says the vendor company (Goldco Developments) was at sale date in financial trouble and since has been forced into receivership. It is to be noted that Mr Corder's valuation of the subject land (apart from the dwelling house and appurtenant land) is at the rate of $21,000 per unit in a filled state.
Another sale referred to by Mr Corder is Lot 17 on RP 200989 parish of Barrow containing 5591 m2 to FW and CM Curley on 19th July, 1991 for $290,000. This land is situated at 439 Pine Ridge Road and at sale date was zoned "Rural". It is situated close to the 457 Pine Ridge Road sale site, and is similar to it except for its size. There is a good solid home upon the land but Mr Corder sees the potential of the site to be for redevelopment with the house being of little, if any, added value. This sale reflects a value, assuming the house is of no added value, of $52.76/m2.
The remaining sale used by Mr Corder is Lot 1 on RP 168444, Parish of Barrow containing 3.691 hectares to Villa World Ltd on 24th June, 1991 for $1,000,000. This land is situated at the corner of Usher Avenue and Whiting Street, Labrador, in close proximity to the resumed land. Mr Corder says it was zoned "Residential A" at sale date. He points out that the sale land was vacant at sale date and required extensive roadworks in Usher Avenue and Whiting Street as well as considerable earthworks on the land itself for residential development. Mr Corder says that Villa World specialises in large duplex developments catering for the lower end of the market, and that it purchases development sites at very depressed prices on the current poor market. The site is now being developed with 84 units and the sale price reflects a value of $11,904 per unit and $27.09/m2.
Mr Corder submits that the sales at 457 Pine Ridge Road and at the corner of Usher Avenue and Whiting Street provide for much larger developments than would the subject property, and that they were made at the very bottom of the market. He submits that these sales would indicate a value per unit of at least $14,000 to $15,000 for the subject land in an unfilled state. But he also says that the sale at 162 Whiting Street is the most comparable of all the sales in size and location.
Mr Parsons was called in evidence by the respondent Council and he describes the nature of the subject land as falling from its south western boundary towards the north east. He says that in general it is low lying and poorly drained land with a 4 metre wide drainage easement which traverses the site from west to east. Apart from an area of about 1200 to 1500 m2, Mr Parsons sees the property to be below RL 3.05 metres AHD. The minimum fill height required for building in the locality is RL 3.1 metres AHD.
Mr Parsons describes the locality within which the resumed land is situated as being one which is developing predominantly for multi-residential purposes. It is located in close proximity to a large recreational reserve and playing fields. Mr Parsons agrees with the claimant and Mr Corder in that the land had at resumption date potential for rezoning from "Residential A" to either "Residential B" or "Special Residential". He considers the highest and best use of the land would be to subdivide a 600 m2 allotment to encompass the existing dwelling house, and then to rezone the balance area to "Residential B" to permit an agreed maximum potential of 25 home units.
Mr Parsons values the resumed property at approximately $380,000 as follows:-11,940 m2 site zoned "Residential A" at $27/m2
($12,500/unit site) $325,000
Added value of existing dwelling $ 55,000
$380,000
=====
Mr Parsons describes the dwelling house on the subject land as being about 20 years of age and not well maintained. He says it is constructed on brick piers and base, has hardwood and concrete reinforced floors, brick and asbestos cement external walls, plastered and asbestos cement internal walls and ceilings and a concrete tile roof. He agrees with Mr Corder in that the building provides a living area of 130 m2, a garage/laundry area of 63 m2 with 30 m2 of patio. Mr Parsons values the house at $300/m2 for the living area, $200/m2 for the garage/laundry and $100/m2 for the patio. He submits that the fitting and fixtures in the building are poor to average quality and require maintenance. Repairs are needed to the guttering and shower screen, there is a need to replace missing tiles in the bathroom, toilet and kitchen, internal and external painting is required and replacement of cracked windows is necessary. It is to be noted that Mr Parsons did not inspect the dwelling house internally at resumption date and the evidence is that since resumption there has been considerable deterioration and lack of maintenance of it. Mr Corder had the advantage of inspecting the building internally at or about the time of resumption.
Mr Parsons suggests following rising mortgage interest rates and economic uncertainty during 1989, the market on the Gold Coast for home units became depressed with values falling on average between 10% and 20% during 1990. The viability of most proposed unit developments became very marginal resulting in poor demand for development sites and a corresponding fall in values. Mr Parsons is of the opinion that demand for low cost housing/units increased during mid to late 1991 and as a result prices have also increased. As a result of poor market conditions at the date of resumption, Mr Parsons says there have been few sales of comparable development sites in the vicinity of the resumed land. He relies for his valuation upon the following sales evidence:208 Central Street, Labrador - Lot 6 on RP 7399 Parish of Barrow - 4803 m2 - Coast Special to LG and PJ Mevissen on 24th February, 1990 for $200,000 - analysed land value $140,000 after making allowance for an added value of $60,000 for a substantial 265 m2 brick and tile dwelling and detached garage - complete with inground pool, driveway and fencing - zoning "Residential B".
Mr Parsons' analysed land value for this site represents $29/m2 or $14,000 per unit site for 10 units. He describes the land as being a good elevated site with a gentle cross fall from west to east. No filling is required and the land faces a bitumen road with concrete kerbing and channelling. Mr Parsons views this land as being quite superior to the subject land. He points out that this property sold previously on 5th September, 1988 for $280,000 with the purchasers then intending to develop 9 units and to retain the dwelling on one group title lot. Mr Parsons points to the sale and re-sale to support his opinion that the market for residential land was weakening by early 1990 and claims that if this was the only sale relied upon by him, then his valuation of the resumed land would be below $27/m2.
457 Pine Ridge Road, Runaway Bay - Lot 14 on RP 200986 - 1.544 ha - Goldco Developments Pty Ltd to RL Hayton on 12th October, 1990 for $500,000. The zoning of this site is "Special Residential". It is to be noted that this sale was also referred to by Mr Corder. The sale price reflects a value of $32.38/m2 or $12,195 per unit site for an approved 41 unit development. Component 1 headworks charges totalling $57,717 ($1407 per unit site or $3.74/m2) were paid in 1989.
The land falls gently from Pine Ridge Road to near level land fronting Oxley Drive. Some minor earthworks are required for development. Mr Parsons says the sale land is situated in a good and superior residential environment although he agrees there is a traffic noise problem. Mr Parsons opposes the view taken by Mr Corder that the vendor company was in financial difficulty at sale date. It has since that time proceeded with major office developments at Surfers Paradise, but is now in financial difficulties. Mr Parsons considers the sale land to be superior to the subject property in both the nature of the land and zoning, and he says that this sale does not support Mr Corder's valuation of the resumed land.
Corner Usher Avenue and Whiting Street, Labrador - Lot 1 on RP 168444 Parish of Barrow - 3.691 hectares - Shore Acres Pty Ltd to Villa World Ltd on 24th June, 1991 for $1,000,000 - zoning "Residential A" (application has been submitted to the Council for rezoning to "Residential B"). This sale reflects a value of $27.09/m2 or $12,195 per unit site for the proposed development of 82 duplex units. The sale was not subject to rezoning to "Residential B" and the site is regarded by Mr Parsons to be one of the best duplex or villa or townhouse sites in Labrador. He says as such it is far superior to the subject land but recognises that it is a much larger site. The land is mostly level and elevated with a moderate fall to the north east and north west corners and forms part of the highest land in the area. This sale is also included within Mr Corder's sales material. Mr Parsons says this sale took place in stronger market conditions than those operative at resumption date.
Corner McMillan Street and Olsen Avenue, Labrador - Lot 1 on RP 210561, Parish of Barrow - 6571 m2 - WJ Ryan to Harvey Drew Pty Ltd and Waterway Wonderland Pty Ltd on 5th September, 1991 for $200,000 - zoning "Residential B". Mr Parsons says this site would provide a maximum of 14 units on development. The sale reflects a land value of $30.43/m2 or $14,285 per unit site. The land is described by Mr Parsons as being a fairly level corner site adjoining a drainage reserve and he says it would require some filling. Mr Parsons stresses this sale took place some 12 months after the resumption date when the market was quite a deal stronger. He sees this site as being slightly inferior to the resumed land since it is situated on the busy Olsen Avenue.
Mr Parson was not aware at the time of making his valuation report of the sale used by Mr Corder at 439 Pine Ridge Road to FW and CM Curley. However, he recognises that it is improved with a dwelling house. The block is narrow in shape and Mr Parsons believes it would be difficult to develop. He confirms that some filling is required on the Oxley Road frontage. He says that the recorded sale price was $295,000 not $290,000 as reported by Mr Corder. Nothing turns on this. If the land was considered for development, Mr Parsons sees it as possibly having a yield of 12 units and on this basis, if the value of the house is disregarded (as did Mr Corder), then the sale then reflects a value of $24,583 per unit and Mr Parson stresses that this price is totally out of keeping with the market place. He accordingly speculates that perhaps the highest and best use of the sale site is as zoned ie. an acreage house site.
Mr Parsons has checked his valuation of the resumed property using a hypothetical subdivisional exercise by excising the dwelling house and appurtenant land. This exercise reads:-
Gross realisation:
Dwelling with 600 m2 lot $115,000
Balance land 1.134 ha with potential for
rezoning to allow for 25 units at $12,500
per unit $312,500
$427,500
Less selling costs (dwelling only)
Legals $ 675
Commission $ 3,325 $ 4,000
$423,500
Less profit and risk allowance (15%) for
dwelling component only $ 15,000
$408,500
Less subdivisional costs
Council fees $ 860
Component 2 headworks $ 1,144
Survey $ 500
Interest allowance - $380,000
at 18% for 3 mths $ 17,100 $ 19,604
$388,896
Less acquisition costs
Legals $ 3,000
Stamp duty $ 10,025 $ 13,025
$375,871
=====
Mr Parsons' experience is that the residential market peaked at the end of 1988 and not in 1989 as suggested by Mr Corder. He also is of the opinion that the commercial market rose during 1989 and peaked towards the end of 1989. The latter opinion does not appear to be relevant in this valuation exercise.
Mr Parsons knew of and investigated the sale at 162 Whiting Street to the Queensland Housing Commission. He thought the price was high. He interviewed the parties and says that on the sale history in the area, the sale didn't make sense. The property sold in mid 1991 at the same price as it was purchased by the vendor in mid 1989 when Mr Parsons says that the market was much stronger. He spoke to a secretary of the vendor company who advised him the price obtained for the land from the Queensland Housing Commission would have been very difficult to achieve in the open market. Mr Parsons says the site had the capability to provide 18 units and on this basis the sale price reflected $20,800 per unit and Mr Parsons says this price has not been paid in the Labrador area since the boom period of 1989. The company secretary also informed Mr Parsons that it was always the vendor's intention that the land would be sold as part of a house/land package deal. Mr Parsons says Mr Corder is in error in stating that this sale land was at sale date zoned "Residential A". He says it was rezoned from "Residential A" to "Special Residential" on 13th May, 1991. As there was no other sales evidence which supported the level of value paid by the Queensland Housing Commission, then Mr Parsons decided not to rely on that sale as evidence of value of the resumed land.
Commenting upon his valuation of the subject dwelling house and appurtenant land, Mr Parsons indicated that there were very few sales of dwellings in the area over $100,000. He emphasised the subject area is a low cost housing area and he cannot find any sale which would support Mr Corder's valuation of the house and appurtenant land at $130,000. Mr Parsons regards the sale at 66 Whiting Street to be in a better residential environment. The site is improved with a weatherboard dwelling which he agrees is inferior to the subject dwelling house. The sale at 6 Koonwarra Street is also regarded by Mr Parsons as being a better property - the house he says is better presented but he agrees that it has a smaller floor area. The sale at 171 Whiting Street is regarded by Mr Parsons as being a sound basis for valuation. It is not situated in a good residential area.
Mr Parsons criticises Mr Corder's valuation of the resumed property in so far as he has not made any allowance for subdivision costs, time delays and holding charges or profit in his valuation which involves the excision of the house and appurtenant land. I agree with this criticism.
In view of the reliance placed upon the sale of 162 Whiting Street by the claimant, then counsel for the respondent called in evidence Edwin George William Cripps who is the manager of the land division of the Department of Housing and Local Government. Mr Cripps is also a registered valuer. He confirmed that the site was acquired by the Queensland Housing Commission as part of what he says was a house and land package deal and that it was virtually the full package which his Department was concerned with in the end. Mr Cripps told us that negotiations went on with the vendor for a considerable period of time for the development by the vendor of residential buildings on the site. The original proposal was for the erection of 8 duplex buildings on 8 individual sites. Although the Queensland Housing Commission wanted to obtain accommodation in the Gold Coast area due to fairly high demands, Mr Cripps indicated that that type of accommodation didn't suit, so progressively a number of resubmitted tenders were received as the project developed but the ultimate tender price was $1,524,600. Mr Cripps explained that for house and land packages, once the Department purchases land as an initial contract with a builder, the same day and contemporaneously a building contract is signed. In the case of the purchase of 162 Whiting Street, Mr Cripps said that the Department thought that the purchase price for the Land was fairly representative of the market at that time.
Also called in evidence by the respondent Council was Delao Iezzi, who is a building contractor and whose company sold 162 Whiting Street to the Housing Commission. Mr Iezzi told us that he bought the land originally for the purpose of a package deal with the Queensland Housing Commission which had opened tenders at that time. Mr Iezzi described the market for land in the area when he bought it in 1989 as being very buoyant. He outlined his negotiations with the Queensland Housing Commission which took place over a considerable period of time and when he settled on a price of $375,000 for the land he was trying to get the Department "to compensate, to really give us the money that it cost us up to that stage with all the work with so many presentations, all the holding charges and the professional fees and when the full package was accepted we submitted a sort of break up on how we wanted it paid, so much for the land and so much for the construction".
Mr Iezzi told us that he had considered putting the land on the market and selling separately rather than selling it to the Queensland Housing Commission. But he says there was not a chance of selling it and getting his money back because the market had dropped by that time. He says further that the price for the land was set at $375,000 because "that it was we paid for it".
During the hearing of the matter the parties requested the Court to take a view of the subject land and on the sales evidence parcels. This view has been taken and it has been of considerable assistance to me in my task of appreciating the evidence.
Now it seems clear to me that for Mr Corder's valuation of the land and improvements to be adopted as a basis for the determination of compensation, then the Court must find that the price paid by the Queensland Housing Commission for the 162 Whiting Street land ($375,000) represented market value for it at sale date - viz June 1991. Now the evidence clearly demonstrates that this sale is but part of an overall contract of sale of land and the development of houses. The vendor was to construct the residential buildings for the purchaser (Queensland Housing Commission) and the total value of the package was $1,524,600. While it is that Mr Cripps did say that he thought that the price paid for the land was in line with the then market, he was under considerable pressure to say so since he did not want to give the public any perceptions that the Queensland Housing Commission would pay in excess of market value for its land bank. This is understandable. I have no evidence that Mr Cripps was familiar with market value trends in the area. Mr Iezzi left the Court in no doubt that the sale price of $375,000 for the land was more than he might have otherwise have been able to obtain for it should he not have been able to sell it to the Queensland Housing Commission. In addition to this, we have the evidence of Mr Parsons that in his view the sale price did not make sense. I have compared as best I can the sale price of 162 Whiting Street with the other englobo sales evidence and cannot but conclude that Mr Parson's opinion about the sale is justified. This is a pity in a sense as the sale of 162 Whiting Street is obviously very comparable with the resumed land.
I turn now to the remaining sales evidence. The common sale at 457 Pine Ridge Road is of assistance and it is a matter of resolving as best I can the opinions of the valuers as to how this sale compares with the subject land. The same can be said of the sale at the corner of Usher Avenue and Whiting Street but I am led to conclude that this is a far more attractive property than is the subject property. In addition it had at sale date a more favourable zoning. But it is of course a considerably larger parcel than is the subject site. The sale used by Mr Corder at 439 Pine Ridge Road is not really of much assistance. There is no evidence of any investigations made with the purchaser Curley as to what might have been his intention for future use of the property and certainly to discount or disregard completely the value of the house on a rural zoned site results in a seemingly high land value of $52.76/m2 - certainly high in relation to the price of $32/m2 paid for the "Special Residential" zoned site at 457 Pine Ridge Road.
I am satisfied on the evidence that Mr Corder's valuation of the house and appurtenant land at $130,000 is to be preferred to Mr Parson's valuation of it at $115,000. Certainly Mr Corder had the advantage of having had an internal inspection of the dwelling house at resumption date.
I have carried out a hypothetical subdivisional exercise similar to that used by Mr Parsons. I have done so since I feel it appropriate that a hypothetical prudent purchaser of the subject property would on sell the house and its appurtenant land and apply for the rezoning of the balance land to either "Residential B" or "Special Residential" to obtain the highest and best use of the site. The evidence leads me to adopt a value of $130,000 for the house and appurtenant land and a value of $15,000 per unit site for the potential 25 units on the balance land. The exercise leads to a finding for a value of the resumed land and dwelling house at relevant date to be in the order of $440,000. I do not see this value as being inconsistent with the sales evidence when the sale of 162 Whiting Street is discarded as a basis of valuation. In the result then, compensation for the resumption is determined under all heads of claim as follows:-Value of dwelling house and land $440,000
Disturbance (legal and valuation fees) $ 2,500
Total compensation $442,500
=====
Section 28 (1) of the Acquisition of Land Act of 1967 provides that the land Court may order that interest be paid upon the amount of compensation determined by it. The subsection further provides that interest shall be at such rate per centum as the Court deems reasonable. An advance of $248,411. 19 was paid by the constructing authority to the claimant by way of an advance against compensation on 30th November, 1990. I order that, in addition to compensation payable, interest be paid by the respondent Council of the City of Gold Coast to the claimant at the rate of 11% per annum on the following sums and for the following periods:-
On the sum of $442,500 for the period commencing on the date of resumption (25th August, 1990) and ending on the date of the payment of the advance against compensation (30th November, 1990) and;
On the sum of $194,088.81 for the period commencing on 1st December,1990 and ending on the day immediately preceding the date upon which final payment of compensation is made.
(C.H. Carter)
Member of the Land Court.
0
0
0