Savimaki v Sunshine Coast Regional Council

The case of Savimaki v Sunshine Coast Regional Council was heard by the Land Court of Queensland and concerned a dispute over the compensation payable for land resumed for the purpose of extending the Maroochydore Airport. The court was tasked with determining the legal issues arising from the resumption, including the admissibility of certain evidence and the valuation of the land in question. The central legal issues revolved around the application of the Pointe Gourde principle in the context of statutory resumption, the admissibility and weight of evidence presented by the constructing authority, and the valuation of the resumed land.

The court held that the Pointe Gourde principle, which dictates that changes in land value due to a public scheme are not compensatable, applied as the resumption was part of a wider scheme for airport extension. The court further noted that the Land Court is not bound by strict rules of evidence, and it could draw an inference adverse to the constructing authority when no evidence was led. The offer to purchase by the constructing authority was deemed admissible as evidence of value, despite competing authorities, and the court considered the relevance and weight of such evidence. The court rejected evidence from a commercial agent indicating market interest for development purposes, as it did not directly relate to the value of the land for resumption purposes. Additionally, the court disregarded expert evidence that lay outside the witness’s field of expertise.

The Land Court determined that compensation should be calculated by deducting the area of a “floating” road reserve within the resumed land. The court ordered compensation in the sum of Six Million Eight Hundred and Seventy-Six Thousand, Five Hundred and Ninety Dollars ($6,876,590) and awarded interest on the determined compensation according to the rates published on the Land Court’s website. The court also allowed either party to make submissions regarding the compensation for the reserve area of 0.8119 hectares within 14 days of the decision, with the option for further oral submissions on the matter. This case highlights the complexities in statutory resumption and the application of legal principles in determining compensation.