£11,558 AWARDED

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20431, 16 December 1940, Page 12

£11,558 AWARDED

HARBOUR BOARD CASE CLAIM AGAINST P.W.D. NAPIER HOUSING LAND By a unanimous decision of the court, £11,558, with costs £l5O, was awarded by the Compensation Court to the Napier Harbour Board in its action against the Public Works Department for compensation for lands taken by the Crown for the erection of State houses. The amount claimed was £21,000 and the amount offered £7OOO. The judgment was delivered by the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, with whom were associated Mr. A. J. McGlashan. assessor for the board, and Mr. W. R. Birnie, assessor for the department. “The value of land,” says the judgment, “is to be taken to be the amount which the land, if sold in the open market by a willing 1 seller, might, be expected to realise. Its special suitability or adaptability for any purpose shall not be taken into account if that purpose is (inter alia) a purpose for which there is no market apart from the special needs of the particular purchaser or the requirements of any Government department or any local or public authority. The iarid in this case was admittedly suitable and intended by claimant for building purposes, and must be so valued. What the court has to consider is the sum which the land as freehold might be expected to realise in the open market if the claimant had been willing to sell to' a person or company desirous of acquiring the land for subdivision and sale as building sites. “A great deal of evidence has been given regarding the housing scheme carried out on the land by the Housing Department, and particularly as to the money expended on that scheme. Both sides have urged the circumstances of and incidental to that scheme, offering valuable evidence to guide us in the somewhat difficult question the court has to decide. Evidence regarding the housing scheme has certainly been useful, but it must be remembered in considering that evidence, that a private owner is not necessarily in the same position as a Government department. “The court awards as the amount of compensation to be paid for the land taken £11,558, which it considers to be fair value in accordance with the rules and principles previously mentioned. It may be added that the best proof of the fairness of the sum awarded is that it was worked out and agreed on by the assessors jointly, independently of the president of the court, and that their result accords substantially with the amount the president had himself computed independently.”