Nasser v Roads and Traffic Authority; Millstar Holdings Pty Limited v Roads and Traffic Authority [2006] NSWLEC 181

Nasser v Roads and Traffic Authority; Millstar Holdings Pty Limited v Roads and Traffic Authority [2006] NSWLEC 181

The Court held that the public purpose for s 56(1)(a) commenced with the 1993 announcement of the national highway program, causing planning blight such that, but for the WSO, the subject lands would have been zoned 4(a) Industrial at acquisition. However, substantial flooding and ecological constraints meant only a portion of Millstar land would be developable; a prudent hypothetical purchaser would factor in development risk and greater fill costs. The Court preferred the respondent's approach to betterment (7% allowance), development risk (25% deduction for Millstar), and constrained land value. Compensation was calculated on these bases, producing an amount of $2,116,742 for Millstar,...

Parties
Applicant: Fred Nasser; Applicant: George Nasser; Applicant: Michael Nasser; Applicant: Millstar Holdings Pty Ltd; Respondent: Roads and Traffic Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Appeal / Judgment After Hearing of Compensation Appeal
Outcome
Compensation for Millstar land determined at $2,116,742, subject to orders; compensation for Nasser land to be finalised after submissions on vegetation; orders on disturbance, costs, and final Nasser market value reserved.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition of Land, Just Terms Compensation, Market Value Assessment, Public Purpose Definition, Flooding Constraints, Ecological Constraints, Development Risk, Comparable Sales, Betterment, Industrial Zoning, Vegetation Protection
Administrative Law Property Law Planning Law Environmental Law Compulsory Acquisition of Land Just Terms Compensation Market Value Assessment Public Purpose Definition +7 more

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fred Nasser

Applicant

George Nasser

Applicant

Michael Nasser

Applicant

Millstar Holdings Pty Ltd

Applicant

Roads and Traffic Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Class 3 Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Appeal / Judgment After Hearing of Compensation Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the relevant 'public purpose' under s 56(1)(a) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 for the subject land acquisition?
  2. 2 Whether the Western Sydney Orbital (WSO) proposal caused a decrease in the value of the land under s 56(1)(a) of the Just Terms Act?
  3. 3 Would the land have been rezoned for industrial use but for the WSO?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the public purpose for s 56(1)(a) commenced with the 1993 announcement of the national highway program, causing planning blight such that, but for the WSO, the subject lands would have been zoned 4(a) Industrial at acquisition. However, substantial flooding and ecological constraints meant only a portion of Millstar land would be developable; a prudent hypothetical purchaser would factor in development risk and greater fill costs. The Court preferred the respondent's approach to betterment (7% allowance), development risk (25% deduction for Millstar), and constrained land value. Compensation was calculated on these bases, producing an amount of $2,116,742 for Millstar,...

Court Disposition

Compensation for Millstar land determined at $2,116,742, subject to orders; compensation for Nasser land to be finalised after submissions on vegetation; orders on disturbance, costs, and final Nasser market value reserved.

Orders

  • Compensation for acquired Millstar land determined as $2,116,742.
  • Parties to advise on Nasser compensation calculation following submissions on vegetation.