First
for
item 11 in Schedule, which provides the means a landowner who has been refused consent to commence building works under section 15(1)(a), to claim compensation for the reduction in open market value of his land; and
item 12 in Part 1 of the First Schedule, which provides the means for a landowner, who has been required under section 15(1)(c) to amend his
building plans or to comply with a condition imposed to
accommodate the
railway, to claim for additional costs incurred.
In all three places, the Ordinance at present refers to stages 1 to 6 and stage 8 of the railway" i.e. those sections completed or under construction. proposed to add a reference to
It is now the Eastern Harbour Crossing at all three points So the above provisions are made applicable.
Consequence of earlier amendment
5
In 1983, section 6 of the Ordinance was amended. Up to that time, the section had given the Governor the over land power to order creation of easements in, under or in the railway area. The amendment simply added the words "or rights". It is requirement of the Railway Area Plans prepared under section 3 that they delineate the area within which "land may be
be resumed or easements
created". Following the amendment to section 6, the words "or rights" should have been added to section 3 also. This overlooked at the time but has since been noted. proposed to remedy the oversight.
Financial and staffing implications
6
matter was It is now
However,
There are no staffing implications of the proposed Bill. There may be some claims for compensation. under the terms of the EHC Project Brief as negotiated the successful consortium must reimburse to Government all claims for resumption, clearance and compensation. A clause to this effect has been included in the contract between the successful consortium and Government and this will include claims under the Ordinance. Therefore, there are financial consequences for Government in the proposed Bill.
no
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.