Wong v Health Administration Corporation

Case [2019] NSWLEC 1443


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Wong v Health Administration Corporation [2019] NSWLEC 1443
Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 13 June 2019; 28 August 2019
Date of orders: 15 October 2019
Decision date: 15 October 2019
Jurisdiction:Class 3
Before: Parker AC
Decision:

The Court Orders:
(1) Compensation is determined in the sum of $2,860,124.00, pursuant to s 55 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (Act) (Compensation), for the acquisition of the whole of Lot 7 in Deposited Plan 13997, being the land known as 71 Botany Street, Randwick.
(2) The Applicants are to duly complete, execute and deliver to the Respondent the deed of release and indemnity to be issued by the Respondent within 28 days of the final orders in these proceedings, with such deed to reflect these terms of agreement and provide for the subject matter of the proceedings being finalised on a full and final basis.
(3) Within 28 days of the Respondent receiving the Applicants' duly completed and executed deed of release and indemnity and direction as to payment, the Respondent will pay the Applicants:
(i) the Compensation less any advance compensation paid;
(ii) statutory interest in respect of the Compensation calculated in accordance with the Act; and
(iii) an amount in respect of the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings as agreed between the parties during the conciliation process (with no interest payable on this amount).

Catchwords: COMPULSORY ACQUISITION – market value –disturbance – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991
Cases Cited: Adams v Valuer General [2014] NSWLEC 1005
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Juah Mon Wong (First Applicant)
Chee Seong Lim (Second Applicant)
Health Administration Corporation (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
A Perkins (Solicitor) (Applicant)
P Briggs (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Project Lawyers Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2018/339360
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

  1. COMMISSIONER: These proceedings comprise an objection to an offer of compensation in the amount of $2,740,124.00 arising from the compulsory acquisition by the Respondent of 71 Botany Street, Randwick, being Lot 7 in Deposited Plan 13997, from the Applicant under s 66 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (the Act), with the Court required to determine the amount of compensation payable by the Respondent to the Applicant which is within Class 3 of the Court’s jurisdiction.

  2. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties, which was held on 13 June 2019 and 28 August 2019. I presided over the conciliation conference.

  3. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Respondent agreeing to pay the Applicant compensation under the Act of $2,860,124.00 arising from the compulsory acquisition.

  4. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 66(2) of the Act to hear and dispose of the Applicant’s claim for compensation.

  5. I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. The parties adopted a comparable sales approach to valuation in accordance with Adams v Valuer General [2014] NSWLEC 1005 and in a manner that could be adopted by the Court.

  6. As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.

  7. The Court orders:

  1. Compensation is determined in the sum of $2,860,124.00, pursuant to s 55 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (Act) (Compensation), for the acquisition of the whole of Lot 7 in Deposited Plan 13997, being the land known as 71 Botany Street, Randwick.

  2. The Applicants are to duly complete, execute and deliver to the Respondent the deed of release and indemnity to be issued by the Respondent within 28 days of the final orders in these proceedings, with such deed to reflect these terms of agreement and provide for the subject matter of the proceedings being finalised on a full and final basis.

  3. Within 28 days of the Respondent receiving the Applicants' duly completed and executed deed of release and indemnity and direction as to payment, the Respondent will pay the Applicants:

  1. the Compensation less any advance compensation paid;

  2. statutory interest in respect of the Compensation calculated in accordance with the Act; and

  3. an amount in respect of the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings as agreed between the parties during the conciliation process (with no interest payable on this amount).

………………………..

D Parker

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********

Details
AGLC
Wong v Health Administration Corporation [2019] NSWLEC 1443
Case
[2019] NSWLEC 1443
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wong, the applicant, brought a claim against the Health Administration Corporation, the respondent, seeking compensation for the compulsory acquisition of their land pursuant to the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. The dispute was heard and determined by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The applicant argued that the compensation offered by the respondent was inadequate and sought a higher amount based on the land's market value and other relevant factors.

The primary legal issue the court had to resolve was the appropriate compensation payable to the applicant for the acquisition of their property. The court had to consider the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, including the factors outlined in section 55, to determine the just terms compensation. The applicant argued that the respondent's offer did not adequately reflect the true value of the land and sought a higher compensation amount. The respondent, on the other hand, maintained that the offer made was fair and reasonable, taking into account all relevant factors.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, the court found that the compensation offered by the respondent was indeed inadequate. The court determined that the applicant was entitled to a higher compensation amount, taking into account the market value of the land, its potential for future development, and other relevant factors. The court awarded the applicant compensation in the sum of $2,860,124.00, along with statutory interest and costs as agreed upon during the conciliation process. The court also ordered the applicant to execute and deliver a deed of release and indemnity to the respondent within 28 days of the final orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Court Orders:

(1) Compensation is determined in the sum of $2,860,124.00, pursuant to s 55 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (Act) (Compensation), for the acquisition of the whole of Lot 7 in Deposited Plan 13997, being the land known as 71 Botany Street, Randwick.

(2) The Applicants are to duly complete, execute and deliver to the Respondent the deed of release and indemnity to be issued by the Respondent within 28 days of the final orders in these proceedings, with such deed to reflect these terms of agreement and provide for the subject matter of the proceedings being finalised on a full and final basis.

(3) Within 28 days of the Respondent receiving the Applicants' duly completed and executed deed of release and indemnity and direction as to payment, the Respondent will pay the Applicants:

(i) the Compensation less any advance compensation paid;

(ii) statutory interest in respect of the Compensation calculated in accordance with the Act; and

(iii) an amount in respect of the Applicant’s costs of the proceedings as agreed between the parties during the conciliation process (with no interest payable on this amount).

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.