The Ardgowan Estate.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 5357, 7 September 1895, Page 6

The Ardgowan Estate.

JUDGMENT OF THE COMPENSATION COURT. [Peb Press Association.] DIJNEDIN, Sept. 6. . Mr Justice Williams delivered the decision of the Compensation Court this afternoon in respect to the Ardgowan Estate, compulaorily taken under the Land for Settlements Act. The Minister offered .£29^911 for the 4241 acres, while the New Zealand, and Australian Land Company asked £45,890. It will be seen from the award that tha Court gives £4689 more than was offered and £11,290 less than was asked. His Honor, in his judgment referring to the question, said : —It seems to me ttaab if there are two estates under the same management, and one of them is compulsorily taken, and by reason of such compnleorily taking an additional burden is thrown on the estate which is left, the Court is justified, in estimating the amount of compensation, in considering that circumstance. It was also, suggested by Mr Newton, though it was not seriously pressed— nor, indeed, could it be seriously pressed— that the Court ought to look at the Land for Settlements Act, at the object for which the land is being taken, and at the expense that the Government would be pat to in working out the Act. I am quite satisfied that; this coarse ,has nothing whatever to do with that. We are referred by the Land for Settlements Act to the Public Works Act, and it . is from the provisions of the Pu&tc Works Act, and from those provisions Sjpae, that the compensation should be assessed. 'It is a well-recog-nised principle of the law of compensation i in England— and the principle is founded on common sense — that the measure of compensation cannot be the gain or the loas of the person who takes the land, but that it must be tHe logs of the person from whom the land was taken. It was further suggested by Mr Chapman that there was a rule that an allowance of Borne 10 per cent should be made where land is compulsorily taken. It may be that in England there ia not a law but what may be called a rule of thumb of that kind. However, there ia certainly no such definite rule here. All. that we have to do is to ascertain the fair Belling value of the land taken, assuming it to.be sold in one lot or in parcels, as: may be most advantageous to the owner, at the time the value was to be estimated. Those, I think, are all the questions which were raised at 1 the hearing, and I now proceed to pronounce the award of the Court, which I am happy to say we have arrived at unanimously. The Court awards that the sum of £34,600 be paid to the claimant as a gross sum in reßpect of all demands. We also award that the claimant receive for coßts the sum of £100, and also disbursements and witnesses', including, of course, the expenses of all qualified witnesses where necessary. It will be necessaiy for that amount to be ascertained before the Court can pronounce its final award, because the total sum, inoluding the costs, is to be mentioned in the award; so what we shall do is this, that the Court will adjourn till some day next week, and the registrar can ascertain, probably with the assistance of the parties, what that amount is. If the parties are not Batiefied with the Registrar's decision, and do not accept; they can come to us. It is for me to fix the assessors' fees, and these I fix at five guineas eanh per day for five days. There will be no further fee for the adjourned Bitting.