LAND FOR RAILWAY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21830, 19 June 1934, Page 12

LAND FOR RAILWAY

COMPENSATION DISPUTE QUESTION OF BETTERMENT OWNER'S CLAIM UPHELD [by TELEGRAPH —own correspondent] WELLINGTON, Monday Because of the determination of the Government not to complete the railway to Dargaville, upon which much work has been done, a matter bearing on the question of betterment was brought before the Full Court recently and judgment was delivered today. The Crown f-oucht to set off betterment against an award made bv a Compensation Court in claimant's favour for injurious affection. Claimant, Annie Elizabeth Ficlayson, is the ov\ner of land situated not far from Dargaville and land which shfl lost was taken by the Crown for railway construction purposes. The Compensation Court had under consideration two claims. In one case claimant had been deprived of a frontage to a public road, and in the case of the other land the effect of taking part of it had been to sever one part of claimant's property from another part. "Claimant contends that her liability to give credit for betterment is based on the assumption that the whole of the railway will be completed, and not on the assumption that part or parts of the work will be finished." stated Mr. Justice Herdman. "Her yiew is that the Crown is not entitled to divide public work undertaken into two parts, the part -which is completed and the part which will never be completed, and then to insist upon the right to get betterment. "When the statute speaks of an increase in value likely to be caused by execution of the work, 1 think the section should be construed to mean work authorised which has been, or will be, completed, and not a work which, although commenced, will never be finished or may never be finished. 1 think, too, that as. the Crown must strictly establish its claim to set off betterment, it must furnish to the tribunal dealing with the claim for compensation satisfactory proof pointing to a settled determination to execute the work which has given rise to the claim. "If the work authorised is the construction of a line 20 miles in length, must the landowner give credit for betterment if one mile of the 20 is constructed and the work is then stopped? The Crown's right to betterment arises because it was proposed to execute certain work, but the evidence before the Court is that the work has been stopped. To prove that the works have been partly executed only, and may never be wholly executed, is not, I think, sufficient to justify an award for betterment." The Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, Mr. Justice Blair and Mr. Justice Kennedy, agreed with Mr. Justice Herdman's conclusion.