Novelty Dept Store v Collector of Land Revenue: Compulsory Land Acquisition & Compensation

Novelty Dept Store Pte Ltd appealed to the Court of Appeal of Singapore against the decision of the Land Acquisition Appeals Board, which affirmed the Collector of Land Revenue's compensation award for the compulsory acquisition of their land. The court dismissed the appeal, finding that sales involving sale and leaseback arrangements were unsuitable comparables for valuing the appellant's land. The court varied the costs order.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed in Substance

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal concerning compensation for compulsory land acquisition. The court upheld the initial compensation, finding sales involving SLB arrangements unsuitable comparables.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
The Collector of Land RevenueRespondentGovernment AgencyJudgment for RespondentWon
Elaine Liew of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Aurill Kam of Attorney-General’s Chambers
David Lee Yeow Wee of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Novelty Dept Store Pte LtdAppellantCorporationAppeal Dismissed in SubstanceLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Sundaresh MenonChief JusticeYes
Chao Hick TinJudge of AppealNo
Chan Sek KeongSenior JudgeNo

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Elaine LiewAttorney-General’s Chambers
Aurill KamAttorney-General’s Chambers
David Lee Yeow WeeAttorney-General’s Chambers
Chua Boon BengMallal & Namazie
Ong Ai WernMallal & Namazie
Mirza NamazieMallal & Namazie

4. Facts

  1. Novelty Dept Store subleased land from Jurong Town Corporation.
  2. The land was compulsorily acquired for the Tuas West Mass Rapid Transit Extension.
  3. The Collector initially awarded $13.2m as statutory compensation.
  4. The Collector made a supplementary award of $1m, increasing the total compensation to $14.2m.
  5. Novelty Dept Store claimed the true market value was $23m.
  6. The Land Acquisition Appeals Board dismissed Novelty Dept Store's appeal.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Novelty Dept Store Pte Ltd v Collector of Land Revenue, Civil Appeal No 11 of 2015, [2016] SGCA 15

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Notice given to Novelty Dept Store that its land was to be compulsorily acquired.
Collector awarded statutory compensation of $13.2m to the appellant.
Appellant lodged a notice of appeal against the initial award.
Appellant filed its petition of appeal.
Collector made a supplementary award of $1m, increasing the total statutory compensation to $14.2m.
Court hearing.
Grounds of decision delivered.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Valuation of Compulsorily Acquired Land
    • Outcome: The court held that sales involving sale and leaseback arrangements were not suitable comparables for valuing the appellant's land.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Suitability of sale and leaseback arrangements as comparables
      • Suitability of JTC standard factories as comparables
      • Use of post-acquisition date sales as comparables
  2. Constitutional Right to Equal Protection
    • Outcome: The court held that the appellant's constitutional right to equal protection was not violated because the appellant's land and the CIT Land were not alike for the purpose of assessing market value.
    • Category: Constitutional
  3. Costs of Appeal to the Board
    • Outcome: The court varied the Board's costs order, holding that the appellant should not be made to bear the costs of the appeal to the Board.
    • Category: Procedural

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Higher compensation for compulsory land acquisition

9. Cause of Actions

  • Appeal against compensation award for compulsory land acquisition

10. Practice Areas

  • Compulsory Acquisition
  • Real Estate Law
  • Civil Appeals

11. Industries

  • Real Estate

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Collector of Land Revenue v Mustaq Ahmad s/o MustafaCourt of AppealYes[2002] 1 SLR(R) 413SingaporeCited regarding whether the Board was entitled to take into account provisional planning permission when awarding compensation.
Swee Hong Investment Pte Ltd v Collector of Land RevenueCourt of AppealYes[2004] 1 SLR(R) 664SingaporeCited regarding the court's role in preventing technical arguments from obstructing substantive justice.
Northern Elevator Manufacturing Sdn Bhd v United Engineers (Singapore) Pte LtdCourt of AppealYes[2004] 2 SLR(R) 494SingaporeCited for the distinction between an error of law and a question of law.
Ng Eng Ghee and others v Mamata Kapildev Dave and others (Horizon Partners Pte Ltd, intervener) and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2009] 3 SLR(R) 109SingaporeCited regarding the application of a broader definition of a 'question of law' in appeals against statutory tribunals.
Eng Foong Ho and others v Attorney GeneralCourt of AppealYes[2009] 2 SLR(R) 542SingaporeCited regarding the principle that the equal protection of the law requires like to be treated alike in land acquisition cases.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Land Acquisition Act (Cap 152, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Compulsory acquisition
  • Land Acquisition Appeals Board
  • Sale and leaseback arrangement
  • Market value
  • Statutory compensation
  • JTC standard factories
  • JTC purpose-built factory
  • Comparables

15.2 Keywords

  • land acquisition
  • compensation
  • valuation
  • sale and leaseback
  • SLB
  • Singapore
  • appeal

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Land Law95
Compulsory Acquisition95
Compensation Payable90
Eminent Domain90
Valuation of Land85
Land Acquisition Act80
Property Law75
Costs40
Administrative Law30
Civil Procedure25
Damages20

16. Subjects

  • Land Law
  • Valuation
  • Compulsory Acquisition