Add Your Heading Text Here
The Land Court’s decision in Philip Usher Constructions Pty Ltd v Cross River Rail Delivery Authority & Anor [2025] QLC 18 confirms a simple but important principle: compensation rights under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967are fixed at the date of resumption. Later transactions can transfer those rights, but they can’t expand them.
In 2020, the Cross River Rail Delivery Authority resumed land owned by D&S Ring Family Pty Ltd (Ring). The following year, Philip Usher Constructions (PUC) purchased the balance of the site. In 2022, Ring assigned its compensation rights to PUC.
PUC argued that the assignment gave it a right to compensation in its own capacity. The Authority accepted PUC could exercise Ring’s existing right, but not that a new entitlement had been created.
What the Court Said
The Court agreed with the Authority. President Stilgoe OAM upheld the position that Section 12(5) of the Acquisition of Land Act converts an existing interest at the date of resumption into a right to compensation.
Because PUC had no interest when the land was resumed, it had no right of its own.
The deed of assignment only allowed PUC to pursue the claim Ring already held.
Section 20(2A) of the Act reinforced this position by excluding post-resumption arrangements designed to create or inflate claims.
For planners and developers, three key points stand out:
- Timing matters – compensation rights crystallise at the date of resumption.
- Assignments are narrow – they transfer the benefit of an existing right but do not create new interests.
- The Act prevails – contractual arrangements can’t override statutory limits.
The case is a reminder that compensation claims remain anchored to the ownership and interests in place at the time of resumption. Developers who buy affected land later may gain the benefit of an assignment, but they cannot generate fresh entitlements.
For planners, the decision is a reminder to be alert when projects involve resumed land. If you’re reviewing a site or advising a client, it’s worth checking whether the land has already been subject to resumption and, if so, who held the interest at that time. That determines the availability (and limits) of compensation. It also means that later purchasers cannot treat compensation as a fresh line item to offset development risk. Factoring this in early can avoid misunderstandings and help set realistic expectations for clients and project teams.
This article has been authored by the Mullins Planning & Environment team; Partner, Mitchell Osborne, Partner, Anthony O’Dwyer, and Associate, Gus Haseler.