Challenger Listed Investments Limited v Valuer General [2015] NSWLEC 7

Challenger Listed Investments Limited v Valuer General [2015] NSWLEC 7

It was appropriate to order determination of the proposed separate question because its resolution would substantially narrow the field of controversy on the main issue, could avoid substantial expense and time associated with expert evidence and hearing preparation, carried a strong prospect that the parties could resolve the dispute without further litigation, and was clearly demarcated from other issues. The alternative request to stand the motions over pending the Fivex appeal was rejected because that appeal related only to the Valuer-General's first reason, while the separate question would determine the second and third reasons.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Valuation Appeals / Applicant's Motions for Determination of a Separate Question Pursuant to R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Outcome
In each proceeding, the applicant's motion was granted and the separate question was ordered to be determined before any other question in the proceeding.
Legal Topics
['determination of Separate Question' 'land Value Under S 6 a of the Valuation of Land Act 1916' 'effect of Contamination on Statutory Land Value' 'valuation Appeals']
['land Valuation' 'civil Procedure' 'contaminated Land'] ['determination of Separate Question' 'land Value Under S 6 a of the Valuation of Land Act 1916' 'effect of Contamination on Statutory Land Value' 'valuation Appeals']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 3 Valuation Appeals / Applicant's Motions for Determination of a Separate Question Pursuant to R 28.2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should order that a question about contamination and land value be determined separately and before any other question in the proceedings.' "Whether the motions should instead be stood over until after the Court of Appeal delivered judgment in the Valuer-General's appeal in Fivex Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2014] NSWLEC 27."]

Ratio Decidendi

It was appropriate to order determination of the proposed separate question because its resolution would substantially narrow the field of controversy on the main issue, could avoid substantial expense and time associated with expert evidence and hearing preparation, carried a strong prospect that the parties could resolve the dispute without further litigation, and was clearly demarcated from other issues. The alternative request to stand the motions over pending the Fivex appeal was rejected because that appeal related only to the Valuer-General's first reason, while the separate question would determine the second and third reasons.

Court Disposition

In each proceeding, the applicant's motion was granted and the separate question was ordered to be determined before any other question in the proceeding.

Orders

  • ['In each proceeding the following question is to be determined separately and before any other question in the proceeding: "Having regard to the agreed facts that the Land is contaminated and that the source of the contamination are the improvements on the Land or their operation, is the contamination of the Land a...