UI v OQ LCRO 225/2011 (8 March 2013) [pdf, 78 KB]
...both transparent, and dictated by the Applicant himself. This is not a case where the Applicant’s land was “devalued” as he claims, but rather that the price he asked for (and got) was in excess of the land value at the time. [30] Having carefully examined all of the information provided I do not see any basis for the contention that the Applicant was unduly pressurised into selling his land at all, or selling at a reduced price. No part of this would support an allegation of...