Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Wednesday, 25 July 1906

Senator KEATING (Tasmania) (Honorary Minister) . - I think the compensation in such a case is provided for in clause 25, sub-clause 3 of which provides that-

Nothing in this section shall take away the right of any person to compensation for damage sustained by reason of the exercise of any power under this Part of this Act.

Senator Millen - That is in the case of actual occupation, but clause 20 deals with resumption without occupation.

Senator KEATING - Where there is actual occupation we make provision that rent shall be paid. I take it that the honorable senator is referring to a case where a resumption takes place simply by notification, and there is no actual occupation. I do not know that there is any provision for the compensation of the owner in such a case.

Senator Millen - There is under the existing law.

Senator KEATING - I believe that if a person is in any way prejudiced or damaged he can recover compensation from the authorities. But if the resumption of land is purely formal, as indicated by notification in the Gazette*, and there is no entry upon the land, the owner does not in every instance, as of right, acquire the right to compensation. Although it is evident that he does under the existing law, I see no reason why he should.

Senator Lt Col Gould - He might be prevented by the notification from making any use of or disposing of his land to advantage.

Senator KEATING - I think that, if he were prevented from cultivating his land-

Senator Lt Col Gould - Or building upon it.

Senator KEATING - Or building upon it, or disposing of it, and could bring forward proof of damage, he would be entitled to compensation under sub-clause 3 of clause 25.

Senator Millen - No. That sub-clause deals with Part III., whilst clause 20 is in Part II. of the Bill

Senator KEATING - I do not think that the owner would be prevented from recovering damages if he could actually prove that he had sustained any.

Senator Lt Col Gould - If he made any claim, the Executive would be in a position to say that they had acted under the law, and he would have no remedy.

Senator KEATING - It is all a question of the actual facts as to the damage sustained. I see no objection to the addition of the words contained in the existing law, because the onus would be thrown upon the owner of showing actual damage. I was under the impression, I must say, that the provision in sub-clause 3 of clause 25 was of more general application than it is.

Amendment (by Senator Millen) agreed to -

That the following words be added : - " And the owner of the land shall be entitled to compensation for any damage which he may have suffered by reason of the notification or of the exercise of the powers of the Minister consequent thereupon."

Suggest corrections