Moloney v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCA 252

Moloney v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCA 252

The costs of building a replacement dwelling on residue land and loss of profits from acquired land were not a direct and natural consequence of the acquisition for the purpose of s 59(f) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW); those losses were either captured by the market value or resulted from carrying out the public purpose, not the acquisition itself. Thus, compensation for disturbance under s 59(f) was not available for those claims.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal From Land and Environment Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['compensation for Compulsory Acquisition' 'market Value' 'disturbance' 'loss of Amenity' 'loss of Profits' 'land Acquisition (just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (nsw)']
['environment and Planning' 'compulsory Acquisition'] ['compensation for Compulsory Acquisition' 'market Value' 'disturbance' 'loss of Amenity' 'loss of Profits' 'land Acquisition (just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (nsw)']

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 / Court of Appeal From Land and Environment Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether compensation is payable for costs of building a replacement dwelling as disturbance under s 59(f) of the Just Terms Act' 'Whether compensation for loss of profits in sugarcane farming is recoverable as disturbance under s 59(f) of the Just Terms Act']

Ratio Decidendi

The costs of building a replacement dwelling on residue land and loss of profits from acquired land were not a direct and natural consequence of the acquisition for the purpose of s 59(f) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW); those losses were either captured by the market value or resulted from carrying out the public purpose, not the acquisition itself. Thus, compensation for disturbance under s 59(f) was not available for those claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed' "Appellants to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed"]