“It’s just been a really,really,really long road. The government has itself to answer to,and the taxpayers,” Hunt said.
Loading
Angela Vithoulkas,who closed her long-standing George Street cafe Vivo in 2018 after years of disruption caused by light rail construction,described the ruling as “bittersweet”.
“We lost our business. Whatever answer came down today was never going to change that.”
Vithoulkas,a former City of Sydney councillor,acknowledged the government could appeal the decision in the “landmark” case,but said business owners deserved justice.
“I’m so happy there will be,most likely,hundreds if not thousands,of small businesses that will be able to have compensation because of what was inflicted on them,” she said.
“I can only hope that this is a lesson that the state government will listen to,and never let this happen to any other small business owner ever again.”
Lawyers for Transport for NSW had denied claims the work had caused a “nuisance” to businesses.
They argued any interference was neither substantial nor unreasonable,and they could not be liable because noise,dust and construction work were inevitable consequences of the construction project.
Loading
But Cavanagh said on Wednesday that the lead plaintiffs had succeeded in their claim that building work on the project had caused the businesses “substantial and unreasonable interference”.
“Despite the public benefit in development of the Sydney light rail,and despite the fact the use of the land might have been reasonable for a period … there came a point in time when it became unreasonable,” he said.
However,Cavanagh identified a “significant problem in applying my findings about substantial and unreasonable interference to all members of the class[action]” as any causes of loss they suffered would vary.
“There may be substantial differences between the impact that the construction of the light rail had on landowners and business owners at certain points along the route compared with others.”
Loading
Cavanagh said a further hearing in October would be required to finalise damages for the lead plaintiffs,and to determine the next steps for resolving further claims.
“Going forward,there will need to be a process or mechanism developed for the determination of both entitlement and loss. My preliminary view is that referees ... should be appointed to determine outcomes based on guidelines and parameters,” Cavanagh said.
Transport for NSW acknowledged the outcome of the case and was considering the judgment.
The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories,analysis and insights.Sign up here.