High Court of Australia
! IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA ~
| | sae upgeen v. _THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered at__.. Syaney - HL Dew, Gr. Pat, Me on. Friday, 9th November, 1951.
o32260/45
(IN LIQUIDATION) F_AUS'
I ve THE CO! WEALTI
BRIDGE LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
ve
'THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA, qupauay, WEBB J,
This is an action for compensation for land acquired by the defendant Commonwealth under tie Lands Acquisition Agt 1906-1936 by a notification dated the 15th August 1945 and published in the Commonwealth Gazette of the 25rd. idem. The plaintiff is a real estate company in liquidation,
In a claim in the prescribed form dated 7th September 1945 and addressed to the Minister the items were:-
1. Unimproved value of land £16,276 2 & 2. Added value given by improvements 37,479 5 2 3. Interest for 16 years from 7th September
1930 25,612 12 2
Total £79,367 19 8 This olaim for £79,367 19 8 is also made in the state
ment of claim in the action. The defence alleges that the amount. Glaimed exceeds what the plaintiff is entitled to.
On 10th December 1945 the Minister offered £9,497 compensation. This offer was refused, and so the claim became a disputed claim for compensation within the meaning of the Act. Qn the 26th August 1946 the Minister offered £11,500 less £726.4,2 arrears of rates, 'This offer aleo was refused,
Counsel for the plaintiff did not press item 3 of the Claim 1,e. £25,612 12 2 for interest at 5% for 16 years. He also stated that the claim in item 1 for £16,276 2 4 took into aceount
eertain outgoings which he felt he could not press, including inte: on purchase money, rates, taxes, stamp duty on transfer, and costs of transfer. I also understood him to say that the amount in item 4 was 3/7ths of the amount in item 2, and that item 2 stated the amount of the oosts incurred by the plaintiff in respect of the purchase of land, of which the area resumed from the plaintiff was about 3/7ths. However, in the transcript of the shorthand notes he is reported as referring to £34,000; but I think this ia a mistake
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate