RD Miller Pty Ltd v Roads and Maritime Services NSW

RD Miller Pty Ltd (the appellant) sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against interlocutory decisions made by Robson J and Duggan J. The dispute concerned a claim for compensation by the appellant against Roads and Maritime Services NSW (the respondent) for loss of access to a controlled access road. The appellant alleged that its land had suffered a loss in market value due to restrictions on access imposed by the respondent.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were the construction of Part 4, Division 5 of the *Roads Act 1993* (NSW) concerning entitlement to compensation, and specifically, the meaning of the phrase "as a result of the road becoming" a controlled access road. The court was required to determine whether this phrase referred to the Minister's order declaring the road a controlled access road, or a broader "course of conduct" by the respondent. Additionally, the court considered whether the *Pointe Gourde* principle was applicable in the assessment of compensation for the "market value of land" in this context.

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal but ultimately dismissed the appeal. The court's reasoning focused on the statutory construction of the *Roads Act 1993*. It held that the entitlement to compensation arose from the specific event of a road being declared a controlled access road by ministerial order, rather than a continuous course of conduct. The court found that the appellant's claim did not fall within the scope of the statutory provisions for compensation, and therefore, the *Pointe Gourde* principle, which deals with the impact of the acquisition itself on market value, was not engaged in the manner argued by the appellant.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal but dismissed the appeal against the decisions of Robson J and Duggan J, ordering the appellant to pay the respondent's costs.