IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jpifpp/v29y2011i2p210-219.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk assessment and compensation analysis of court decisions in compulsory land acquisition compensation cases in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Graeme Newell
  • Nelson Chan
  • Evan Goodridge

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to assess all compulsory land acquisition court decisions in Australia over 1985‐2009 to provide a risk assessment and compensation analysis involved in proceeding to court for compulsory land acquisition cases. Design/methodology/approach - Using the AustLII legal database, every publicly available compulsory land acquisition court case decision in Australia over 1985‐2009 is assessed. These 58 court cases are assessed for claim, offer and judgment value. Findings - A total of 91.4 percent of compulsory land acquisition court cases over 1985‐2009 were found to be successful in achieving a judgment value of at least that of the offer. The median judgment value for successful cases was 60 percent higher than the offer value, while for unsuccessful cases it was 68 percent lower than the offer value. Successful smaller judgments ( $2 million) (median 41 percent upside compensation). Appealed cases were found to be only 28.6 percent successful, with only a maximum of 5.6 percent additional compensation achieved. Practical implications - This paper provides a rigorous empirical risk assessment and compensation analysis for compulsory land acquisition court cases in Australia over the last 25 years. This provides an effective tool for dispossessed property owners, statutory acquirers and their professional legal and valuation advisors for more informed compulsory land acquisition court case decision making. Originality/value - Using all compulsory land acquisition court decisions in Australia over the last 25 years, this paper is the first attempt internationally to rigorously and empirically conduct a risk assessment and compensation analysis involved with proceeding to court for compulsory land acquisition cases. Given the significance of the compulsory land acquisition process, this empirically validated research enables a more informed and critical understanding of the risk factors and compensation outcomes attached to the compulsory land acquisition court case judgment process.

Suggested Citation

  • Graeme Newell & Nelson Chan & Evan Goodridge, 2011. "Risk assessment and compensation analysis of court decisions in compulsory land acquisition compensation cases in Australia," Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 29(2), pages 210-219, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eme:jpifpp:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:210-219
    DOI: 10.1108/14635781111112800
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14635781111112800/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/14635781111112800/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/14635781111112800?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jyoti Shukla & Piyush Tiwari, 2022. "Measuring Inadequacy in Compensation for the Compulsory Acquisition of Land: Evidence from Bengaluru, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jpifpp:v:29:y:2011:i:2:p:210-219. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.