EX TEMPORE Judgment
1This is a case management hearing of proceedings in the new "North West Rail Compensation List", administered by the Court as a subset of the Class 3 Compensation List. Proceedings in the North West Rail Compensation List are for compensation for the compulsory acquisition of land for the purpose of the North West Rail Link. Proceedings will be added to the list as they are commenced and deleted as they are finalised. To assist the Court to identify new proceedings belonging in the list, the solicitors for the respondent acquiring authority, Transport for NSW, agree to endorse the respondent's notice of appearance with the words "North West Rail Compensation List".
2A consensus has emerged this morning among the represented parties, with which I generally agree, that it is desirable that compensation claims for resumed properties in proximity to each other, such as those in the same precinct under the State Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Region Growth Centres) 2006 (Growth Centres SEPP), should be heard together where it is expected that they would have had a similar market value at the resumption date under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation Act 1991. This is in order to avoid the risk of inconsistent Court decisions as to their market value based on different evidence and submissions, and to save time and costs in managing and hearing sufficiently similar matters. The problem of inconsistent compensation decisions, particularly concerning market value, by different decision-makers is exacerbated by the fact that the various applicants mostly have different expert witnesses (they also have different lawyers), and in some matters the respondent also has different expert witnesses (albeit the respondent has rationalised by retaining the same solicitors).
3Case management considerations led Preston CJ of LEC to order that seven of the proceedings in Riverstone East Precinctunder the Growth Centres SEPP be tried together: Attard & Ors v Transport for NSW [2013] NSWLEC 176. They were tried together by me with an eighth related proceeding and judgment is reserved (Attard x 2, Xiguis, Hsia, Sultana, Camilleri x 2, and Milicevic). Meanwhile judgment has been delivered in the matter of Bonomo v Transport for New South Wales [2014] NSWLEC 25 relating to land in Area 20 Precinct(Sheahan J), and judgment has been reserved in two other matters relating to land in Area 20 Precinct: De Battista v Transport for New South Wales (Pain J) and Chircop v Transport for NSW (Biscoe J). As decisions of the Court concerning the amount of compensation are delivered, they should provide guidance and facilitate settlement of other proceedings relating to proximately located land resumed for the purpose of the North West Rail Link.
4Annexed hereto and marked as follows are two useful documents prepared by the respondent's solicitors, which it would be helpful if they could update and provide to the Court from time to time, concerning proceedings in the North West Rail Compensation List:
"A" An aerial map on which has been superimposed the location of the acquired properties. However, it does not show the location of the Refalo and Canulli properties to which Annexure B refers.
"B" A schedule showing details of the proceedings relating to the acquired properties. As I understand it from the respondent's solicitor, there are also three other proceedings not referred to in this Schedule relating to land outside the Growth Centres SEPP precincts acquired for the same purpose that should be added to the North West Rail Compensation List: the respondent's solicitor should make arrangements with the Registry for them to be so designated.