Statewide Property Ventures Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2008] NSWLEC 140

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Statewide Property Ventures Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2008] NSWLEC 140

APPLICANT Statewide Property Ventures Pty Ltd PARTIES : RESPONDENT Valuer-General

FILE NUMBER(S) : 31227 of 2006

CORAM: Jagot J

KEY ISSUES: Costs :- whether presumption of no order as to costs displaced - appeal maintained after applicant agreed to respondent's value - applicant ordered to pay respondent's costs from date of agreement onwards

LEGISLATION CITED: Valuation of Land Act 1916

DATES OF HEARING: 27 March 2008

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 27 March 2008

APPLICANT Mr Mark Seymour SOLICITORS Hunt & Hunt LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: RESPONDENT Ms A Pearman SOLICITORS Crown Solicitor's Office

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Jagot J

27 March 2008

31227 of 2006

STATEWIDE PROPERTY VENTURES PTY LTD Applicant

VALUER-GENERAL Respondent

JUDGMENT Jagot J: 1 This is an application by the respondent for costs in proceedings 31227 of 2006.

2 The proceedings constituted an appeal under s 37(1) of Valuation of Land Act 1916. Accordingly, it is common ground between the parties that the applicable rules are either Pt 16 r 4 of the Land and Environment Court Rules 1996 or r 3.7 of the Land and Environment Court Rules 2007. It is also common ground between the parties that the difference between these rules is immaterial because both rules provide that the Court is not to make an order for the payment of costs unless the Court considers that the making of an order as to the whole or any part of the costs is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The primary difference between the two versions of the rules is that the new rule sets out in subr (3) examples of circumstances which the Court might consider make an order for costs fair and reasonable in the particular circumstances, whereas Pt 16 r 4 did not provide those examples.