NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Chircop v Transport for NSW [2014] NSWLEC 63 Hearing dates: 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 March, 7 April 2014 Decision date: 28 May 2014 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Biscoe J Decision: Compensation determined in the amount of $3,947,083. Respondent is to pay the applicants' costs. Catchwords: COMPULSORY ACQUISITION - compensation under Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 for resumption of rural residential land ripe for residential subdivision in Area 20 precinct of North West Growth Centre under State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 - determination of market value by selection of appropriate comparable sales and the making of appropriate adjustments - whether certain disturbance loss items not reasonably incurred or not a direct and natural consequence of the acquisition and therefore not recoverable under s 59 - whether compensation for any disturbance loss items barred by s 61. Legislation Cited: Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 cl 276 Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 s 34(3), Part 3 (ss 54-56, 59, 61) Land and Environment Court Act 1979 s 37(1) Metropolitan Strategy 2005 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 cll 2, 3(1)) Transport Administration Act 1988 Cases Cited: Adams v Valuer-General [2014] NSWLEC 1005 Attard v Transport for NSW [2014] NSWLEC 44 Bonomo v Transport for NSW [2014] NSWLEC 25 De Battista v Transport for NSW [2014] NSWLEC 39 El Boustani v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 [2014] NSWCA 33, (2014) 199 LGERA 198 Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales v McDonald [2010] NSWCA 236, (2010) 79 NSWLR 155 Sydney Water Corporation v Caruso [2009] NSWCA 391, (2009) 170 LGERA 298 Category: Principal judgment Parties: John Chircop (First Applicant) Frances Chircop (Second Applicant) Transport for NSW (Respondent) Representation: COUNSEL: T F Robertson SC and J Lazarus (Applicants) C Norton (Respondent) SOLICITORS: Colin Biggers & Paisley (Applicants) Clayton Utz (Respondent) File Number(s): 31263/12
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