Dunning v The Commonwealth [1960] HCA 83

Dunning v The Commonwealth [1960] HCA 83

The trial judge was entitled to rely on the respondent's valuer's method in valuing the land given the paucity of better evidence; interest on compensation is governed separately by statute and not to be included in the compensation judgment; costs discretion should reflect offers made by the Commonwealth that exceeded the awarded compensation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Cross Appeal From Supreme Court of South Australia / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs. Cross-appeal allowed with costs. Judgment of the Supreme Court varied by deleting provisions as to interest and limiting order for costs to up to and including 19 November 1958.
Legal Topics
['compensation Valuation' 'interest on Compensation' 'costs Orders' 'statutory Interpretation']
['compulsory Acquisition' 'land Law' 'administrative Law'] ['compensation Valuation' 'interest on Compensation' 'costs Orders' 'statutory Interpretation']

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

Appeal and Cross Appeal From Supreme Court of South Australia / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['How compensation for compulsorily acquired land should be valued under the Lands Acquisition Act 1906-1936 (Cth) given wartime controls and unique land features;' 'Whether interest should be included in the judgment for compensation;' 'How the discretion as to costs should be exercised in the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to rely on the respondent's valuer's method in valuing the land given the paucity of better evidence; interest on compensation is governed separately by statute and not to be included in the compensation judgment; costs discretion should reflect offers made by the Commonwealth that exceeded the awarded compensation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs. Cross-appeal allowed with costs. Judgment of the Supreme Court varied by deleting provisions as to interest and limiting order for costs to up to and including 19 November 1958.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.' 'Cross-appeal allowed with costs.' 'Judgment of the Supreme Court of South Australia varied by deleting the interest provisions.' 'Order as to costs in the Supreme Court limited to costs up to and including 19 November 1958.']