NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Perilya Broken Hill Limited v Valuer-General (No 3) [2013] NSWLEC 215 Decision date: 16 December 2013 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Biscoe J Decision: (1) By consent, Valuer-General's notice of motion filed on 24 October 2013 is dismissed. (2) Valuer-General is to pay Perilya's costs of that notice of motion on an indemnity basis. (3) Valuer-General is to file and serve its evidence on or before 31 January 2014. (4) List the proceedings for directions, if possible before Biscoe J, on 7 February 2014. Catchwords: COSTS - indemnity costs - valuation appeal - motion by Valuer-General for separate question for determination as to whether s 6A(1) of Valuation of Land Act 1916 requires land value to be determined on the assumption that minerals in the land are privately owned - motion abandoned at almost last moment - Valuer-General agrees to pay other party's costs of motion on the ordinary basis - whether Valuer-General should, in the particular circumstances, pay other party's costs on indemnity basis. Legislation Cited: Crown Lands Act 1989 Land and Environment Court 1979 s 57 Mining Act 1992 ss 282(1), 283(1), 284, Part 13 Valuation of Land Act 1916 ss 6A, 37 Mining Regulations 2003 cl 44 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 r 28.2 Cases Cited: Attorney-General v Brown (1847) 2 SCR (NSW) 30, (1847) 1 Legge 312 Gollan v Randwick Municipal Council [1961] AC 82, (1960) 6 LGRA 275 Minister for Mineral Resources v Brantag Pty Ltd [1997] NSWCA 206, (1997) 8 BPR 15,815 Perilya Broken Hill Ltd v Valuer-General [2012] NSWLEC 235 Rosniak v Government Insurance Office (1997) 41 NSWLR 608 Royal Sydney Golf Club v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1955) 91 CLR 610 Sydney City Council v Valuer-General (1956) 1 LGRA 229 Valuer-General v New South Wales Golf Club [2012] NSWCA 355, (2012) 192 LGERA 105 Valuer-General v Perilya Broken Hill Ltd [2013] NSWCA 265, (2013) 195 LGERA 416 Wade v New South Wales Rutile Mining Co Pty Ltd (1969) 121 CLR 177 Wik Peoples v Queensland [1996] HCA 40, (1996) 187 CLR 1 Category: Separate question Parties: Perilya Broken Hill Limited (Applicant) Valuer-General (Respondent) Representation: COUNSEL: R P L Lancaster SC and L Thomas (Applicant) T S Hale SC and M Carpenter (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Sparke Helmore (Applicant) Crown Solicitor's Office (Respondent) File Number(s): 30076/11
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