Appeal Outcome: Special leave application refused with costs by the High Court - 25 May 2007 New South Wales Court of Appeal CITATION: Leichhardt Council v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 6 HEARING DATE(S): 20 October 2006 JUDGMENT DATE: 9 February 2007 JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ; Beazley JA; Bryson JA; Basten JA; Campbell JA DECISION: The Court orders the amendment of orders 2 and 3 made by the Court in Leichhardt Council v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] NSWCA 353, in order to apply that decision also to the residue land. PARTIES: Leichhardt Council (Appellant) Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales (Respondent) FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40166/2005 COUNSEL: T Robertson SC, L Goodchild (Appellant) B Walker SC, A Galasso SC (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Margaret Lyons (Appellant) Clayton Utz (Respondent) LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Land & Environment Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 30318 of 2003 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Lloyd J LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 4 March 2005 LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: [2005] NSWLEC 86 - 2 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL 40166/2005 SPIGELMAN CJ BEAZLEY JA BRYSON JA BASTEN JA CAMPBELL J Friday 9 February 2007 LEICHHARDT COUNCIL v ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Judgment 1 THE COURT: The Applicant seeks amendment via the slip rule of orders 2 and 3 made by the Court in Leichhardt Council v Roads and Traffic Authority (New South Wales) [2006] NSWCA 353. The Court decided that the valuation of the land should not include a discount on the basis of the land being classified as community land under the Local Government Act 1993. The Applicant points out that this decision applies equally to the residue land as to the acquired land. Orders 2 and 3, which set aside the judgement of the Land and Environment Court and remit the matter for redetermination, apply only to the assessment of the value of the acquired land. The orders do not explicitly apply the decision of the Court to the residue land. The proposed additions ensure that this occurs. The Opponent has agreed to the amendment of the orders as proposed by the Applicant. 2 The Court should order the amendment of orders 2 and 3, in accordance with the terms agreed by the parties. The amended orders would be: 2. Set aside the judgment of the Land and Environment Court delivered on 4 March 2005 to the extent that it assesses market value pursuant to s55(a) of the acquired land and injurious affection pursuant to s55(f) of the residue land. 3. Remit the matter to the Land and Environment Court for determination of the market value of the land and injurious affection of the residue land (being a 30% reduction of its value) without reduction on account of the statutory constraint on alienation of the land in the hands of the Appellant. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.