Arcus Shopfitters Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2002] WASC 174

Arcus Shopfitters Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2002] WASC 174 - WASC 2002 case summary — Zoe

[405]

"Yes. I need to ask you this, and I'm afraid I'm jumping around in time but at the end - that is to say you closed the business or closed the factory in the end of December 1995 and you gave up possession some 5 or 6 months later. Do you recall that? I think it was ?---Gave up possession?

Yes?---I think we gave up possession - it was either in January or February. Anyway, the date is on record.

Yes. I think it may have been a little later. My recollection might be wrong too but I think ?---I will hazard a guess that it was January 18.

Right. Can you assist us with this: at that time in December 95 part of the premises were being leased, were they not, under some arrangement with a tenant who was using part of the premises for - I can't remember, was it carparking, or something of that order?---That 's right.

Do you remember the name of the tenant?---Yes, I do.

Who was that?---Bob Maher.

All right?---He was the gentleman who owned and operated what was then a restaurant or nightclub occupying what was the old post office on Aberdeen Street, almost opposite us.

Can you assist us with a date? From about when was he renting the property and when did he have to vacate? Did he vacate at the same time that you gave up possession?---No. I think Main Roads allowed him to stay for some time.

All right, thank you?---As for when he started, no, I can't remember. I can't put a date on that but it was, I would say, a year or so before we had to quit.

Could I have document number 1 and page 108, thank you?

This is minutes of the directors in October 95, 25 October.

Do you see it on your screen, Dr Arcus?---Yes. I may have it here.

You appear to be present? There seems to be a reference there to Boss Entertainment?---That's it.

Is that the same as Mr Maher?---That's right.

Is Mr Maher Boss Entertainment?---He is the major domo of that institution, yes.

I take it then that he was there from 25 October 1995 until, as you understand it, after the date that you gave up possession of the premises?---That's right.

Very well, thank you. Dr Arcus, was that on 138 Aberdeen Street or on 154 Aberdeen Street?---With respect to the parking arrangement?"

[407]

"Dr Arcus, do you remember the questions this morning concerning the arrangement with Boss Entertainment, Mr Maher?---Bob Maher?

Yes?---Yes.

Can you see it on the screen there, opposite Parking?---Yes, Boss Entertainment, that's him.

Is that an accurate representation of the arrangement with Mr Maher?---Just a minute, I'll read it.

Thank you.

PULLIN J: It's apparently not an exhibit yet, Mrs Rowley.

ROWLEY, MS: No. I did note that, thank you, your Honour?---I can't swear to the exact numbers there, my memory is not that good, but the general purport of this is correct.

It says, 'suggested details of an agreement.' Was that arrangement in place at the date of these minutes?---Would you say that again?

Was that arrangement, the suggested details of the agreement, in place at the date of these minutes, and perhaps we could scroll up to the top of the page to check the date of the minutes.

Do you see the date of the minutes, 25 October?---Yes.

Yes. Have you any idea when that arrangement was put into place?---No, but I would say very soon after.

Very soon after?---It might even have started before that meeting.

Well, it doesn't seem to be suggestive. 'The suggested details of an agreement'

EDMONDS, MR: That's leading again, with respect, your Honour.

ROWLEY, MS: The rental obtained by Arcus in respect of that arrangement, would that appear in their annual turnover for that year?---Would it appear in the annual?

Turnover for 1995?---In the accounts you mean. Would it appear in the accounts?

Yes?---Yes.

It would. It would be treated like that, would it, as part of the income?---It wouldn't be shown in the annual accounts under Boss Entertainment or anything like that.

No, but it would be part ?---No, you wouldn't find it there. It would be lumped in with a whole host of miscellaneous income.

I tender that page, your Honour.

PULLIN J: What document is this in, Mrs Rowley?

ROWLEY, MS: This is document number 1, your Honour, so it's 1.108.

PULLIN J: All right. So page 108 in document 1 will be exhibit 1.108.

EXHIBIT 1.108 Plaintiff Arcus Shopfitters Pty Ltd minute book 1975-1997 - page 108."

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Catchwords

Source

Catchwords

Judgment (431 paragraphs)

Arcus Shopfitters Pty Ltd v Western Australian Planning Commission [2002] WASC 174 (28 June 2002)

Development Approvals Granted by the City of Perth Since 1990

Does the Suburban Area Provide Comparable Sales?

Should Comparable Sales Evidence be Drawn from Northbridge?

Is There a Particular Area of Northbridge which Affords More Satisfactory Comparable Sales Evidence?

Sales of Improved Land - Are they as Reliable as Sales of Vacant Land?

Which is the Most Important Comparable Sale?

Adjustment of Comparable Sales for Increase in Value over Time

Parties

Legislation Cited (4)

Cases Cited (34)