C A MacDonald Limited v South Australian Railways Commissioner [1911] HCA 14

APPELLANTS ;

AND

SOUTH AUSTRALIAN RAILWAYS

} RESPONDENT.

_ ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF : SOUTH AUSTRALIA.

of High Court—Appeal from Supreme Court of State—Judgment of H.C. ov A. ing as persona desiynata—Lands Clauses Consolidation Amendment 1911, S.A.) (44 ct 45 Vict., No. 202), secs. 5, 6,7, 8,9, 10—Compensa- token—Special ataptability of tand—Intention of owner to use ADELAIDE,

ial purpose. May 16, 17, 18, 19. s Clauses Conaolidation Act 1881 (8.A.) it is provided that,

'is acquired, otherwise than by agreement, for public purposes, the grein 0.3., of the amount of compensation, which under the Lands Clauses Gee ation Act 1847 (S.A.) was required to be assessed by a jury sum- by the sheriff and presided over by a Judge, commissioner or the nay on application to a Judge of the Supreme Court be ordered to be he Supreme Conrt" in one of the modes of trial prescribed by the Court Act 1878 (sec. 5); that when an order is made for the trial of on of compensation " before the Court" the question shall be stated rm of an issue (sec. 6) ; that the verdict and judgment thereon shall under and subject to the control and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court ordinary actions therein " (sec. 8) ; that the party claiming compensation be deemed the plaintiff and the promoters of the undertaking the defen- 1d that each party shall have ''all the rights and privileges of a ff and a defendant respectively as in the case of an ordinary action nder the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1878 (sec. 9); and that 'verdict and judgment upon any issue tried under the provisions of this bull, as regards costs and every other matter incident to and con. i 16

H.C. or A. 1911.

ss

Cc. A. MacDonaLD Lrp.

v.

SourH AUSTRALIAN Rartways Commis- SIONER.

HIGH COURT

sequent thereon, have the same operation and be entitled to the same effec if that verdict and jadgment had been the verdict of a jury und the