WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION and SHIM

The matter before the court involved the Western Australian Planning Commission as the applicant and Shim as the respondent. The dispute centred around the compensation payable to Shim for the resumption of his leasehold interest in premises located at Nos 124 to 130 William Street, Perth, following a Notice of Taking published on 5 September 2003. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the value of Shim's leasehold interest should be measured by the value of the business conducted on the premises, and if there was any special value attributable to the leasehold interest.

The court examined the nature of the business conducted by Shim on the premises and whether this business had any unique characteristics that would warrant a higher valuation of the leasehold interest. The court considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the value of the leasehold interest and the business conducted on the premises. The court also explored whether there was any special value to the leasehold interest beyond the value of the business itself.

In determining the compensation payable, the court concluded that the value of the leasehold interest should be measured by the value of the business conducted on the premises. The court found that there was no special value attributable to the leasehold interest beyond the value of the business. Accordingly, the compensation payable to Shim was calculated based on the value of the business, less any advance payments previously made. The court ordered that the compensation payable to Shim was $549,202 together with interest at the rate of $35.80 per day from 12 October 2007 to the date of payment, less the sum of $283,783.75 previously paid by Shim by way of advance payments on 5 March 2004 and 19 April 2004. The question of costs was adjourned to a date to be fixed.