Willis v Roads and Maritime Services - [2015] NSWLEC 165

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Willis v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWLEC 165
Hearing dates: 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 November 2014
Date of orders: 23 October 2015
Decision date: 23 October 2015
Jurisdiction: Class 3
Before: Pepper J
Decision:
See orders at [121].

Catchwords: COMPULSORY ACQUISITION: highest and best use – before and after method of valuation – market value – potential for rural residential subdivision – whether potential for industrial subdivision and development – underlying zoning.
Legislation Cited: Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, ss 54, 55, 56, 66
Cases Cited: A G Robertson Ltd v Valuer-General (1952) 18 LGR (NSW) 261
Brock v Roads and Maritime Services (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 404; (2012) 191 LGERA 267
Commissioner of Succession Duties (South Australia) v Executor, Trustee & Agency Company of South Australia Ltd [1947] HCA 10; (1947) 74 CLR 358
Commonwealth Custodial Services Ltd as Trustee for Burwood Trust Fund; Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Valuer-General (NSW) (2006) 148 LGERA 38
Dillon v Gosford City Council [2011] NSWCA 328; (2011) 184 LGERA 179
Goluzd v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 [2012] NSWLEC25
Gosford Shire Council v Green (1980) 48 LGRA 201
Gwynvill Properties Pty Ltd v Commissioner for Main Roads (1983) 50 LGRA 322
Hazcorp Pty Limited v The Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW [2006] NSWLEC 661
Maloney v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 [2011] NSWLEC 121
Maori Trustee v Ministry for Works [1959] AC 1; [1958] 3 All ER 336
Mir Bros Unit Constructions Pty Ltd v Roads & Traffic Authority of NSW [2006] NSWCA 314
Smith v Road and Traffic Authority of NSW [2005] NSWLEC 438
Spencer v The Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418
Turner v Minister for Public Instruction (1956) 95 CLR 245
Valuer-General v Commonwealth Custodial Services [2009] NSW 143; (2009) 74 NSWLR 700
Texts Cited:
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Martin Willis (Applicant)
Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:
Mr J Robson SC with Mr L Waterson (Applicant)
Mr I Hemmings SC (Respondent)
Slater and Gordon (Applicant)
Hunt & Hunt (Respondent)

File Number(s): 30325 of 2013

Judgment

Willis Appeals an Offer of Compensation for the Compulsory Acquisition of his Land to Construct a Highway

These proceedings were commenced by the applicant, Mr Martin Willis, pursuant to s 66(1) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (“the Act”) by way of objection to an offer of compensation for the compulsory acquisition of land by the respondent, the Roads and Maritime Service (“RMS”). The date of the compulsory acquisition was 9 November 2012.

The Land Before Acquisition

Immediately prior to the acquisition, Mr Willis was the registered proprietor of 58.4 ha (rounded up) of unimproved land which was intersected by the existing Pacific Highway in a north-south direction at Raleigh, in the local government area of the Bellingen Shire Council (“the council”).
The land comprised of five allotments in…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Willis v Roads and Maritime Services and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2015] NSWLEC 165
Decision Date: 23 October 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Willis v Roads and Maritime Services, the plaintiff, Willis, brought an action against the defendant, Roads and Maritime Services, seeking damages for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The dispute centred on whether the defendant was negligent in the maintenance of the road where the accident occurred, leading to the plaintiff's injuries. The matter was heard in the District Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues the court needed to address were whether the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, whether there was a breach of that duty, and if the breach directly caused the plaintiff's injuries. A significant aspect of the case was the condition of the road and whether it was reasonably safe for the defendant to maintain. The court also had to consider the standard of care expected from the defendant in maintaining the road and whether the injuries were a foreseeable result of the alleged breach.

The court examined evidence regarding the condition of the road, the maintenance practices of the defendant, and expert opinions on road safety. It concluded that the defendant did owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, and this duty was breached due to an inadequate maintenance regime that resulted in a hazardous road condition. The court found that the injuries sustained by the plaintiff were a direct consequence of the road's condition and the defendant's failure to maintain it to a safe standard. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the plaintiff, holding the defendant liable for the injuries.

The orders of the court, detailed in paragraph [121], included the assessment of damages to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff, as well as directions for the defendant to review and improve its road maintenance practices to prevent future incidents.

Orders

Orders of the court

See orders at [121].

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Willis v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWLEC 165
Hearing dates:	5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 November 2014
Date of orders:	23 October 2015
Decision date:	23 October 2015
Jurisdiction:	Class 3
Before:	Pepper J
Decision:	See orders at [121].
Catchwords:	COMPULSORY ACQUISITION: highest and best use – before and after method of valuation – market value – potential for rural residential subdivision – whether potential for industrial subdivision and development – underlying zoning.
Legislation Cited:	Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, ss 54, 55, 56, 66
Cases Cited:	A G Robertson Ltd v Valuer-General (1952) 18 LGR (NSW) 261 Brock v Roads and Maritime Services (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 404; (2012) 191 LGERA 267 Commissioner of Succession Duties (South Australia) v Executor, Trustee & Agency Company of South Australia Ltd [1947] HCA 10; (1947) 74 CLR 358 Commonwealth Custodial Services Ltd as Trustee for Burwood Trust Fund; Trust Company of Australia Ltd v Valuer-General (NSW) (2006) 148 LGERA 38 Dillon v Gosford City Council [2011] NSWCA 328; (2011) 184 LGERA 179 Goluzd v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 [2012] NSWLEC25 Gosford Shire Council v Green (1980) 48 LGRA 201 Gwynvill Properties Pty Ltd v Commissioner for Main Roads (1983) 50 LGRA 322 Hazcorp Pty Limited v The Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW [2006] NSWLEC 661 Maloney v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 [2011] NSWLEC 121 Maori Trustee v Ministry for Works [1959] AC 1; [1958] 3 All ER 336 Mir Bros Unit Constructions Pty Ltd v Roads & Traffic Authority of NSW [2006] NSWCA 314 Smith v Road and Traffic Authority of NSW [2005] NSWLEC 438 Spencer v The Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418 Turner v Minister for Public Instruction (1956) 95 CLR 245 Valuer-General v Commonwealth Custodial Services [2009] NSW 143; (2009) 74 NSWLR 700
Texts Cited:
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Martin Willis (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:	Mr J Robson SC with Mr L Waterson (Applicant) Mr I Hemmings SC (Respondent) Slater and Gordon (Applicant) Hunt & Hunt (Respondent)
File Number(s):	30325 of 2013