Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v McDonald

Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) v McDonald concerned a dispute over compensation payable to the respondent landowner following the compulsory acquisition of land by the appellant. The primary issue before the court was the assessment of compensation under the *Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991* (NSW), specifically concerning the landowner's claim for losses attributable to disturbance.

The Court of Appeal of New South Wales was required to determine whether certain costs claimed by the respondent as part of the disturbance loss were costs that would necessarily have been incurred in realising the subdivision potential of the acquired land. A further question was whether allowing these costs would result in "double-dipping" and whether it was unreasonable to allow costs attributable to the payment of rent.

The court reasoned that the compensation awarded should reflect the actual loss suffered by the landowner. It applied principles of statutory interpretation to the *Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991*, focusing on the meaning of "loss attributable to disturbance." The court found that some of the disputed costs were indeed necessarily incurred in realising the land's potential, while others were not. The court also considered the concept of "double-dipping" to ensure that the landowner was not compensated twice for the same loss.

Ultimately, the appeal by the Roads and Traffic Authority was dismissed, and the cross-appeal by the landowner was allowed. The assessment of compensation made by Biscoe J was set aside and substituted with a higher amount. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of both the appeal and the cross-appeal.