Page 3879 - Week 12 - Thursday, 21 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
(4) The current lessees took over the Tuggeranong Pastoral Company Pty. Ltd. in
1988.
(5) The lease issued in 1980 has expired and the Tuggeranong Pastoral Company Pty.
Ltd. has been granted continued occupancy on a month to month tenancy
arrangement subject to the conditions of the 1980 lease.
(6) In November 1990 the lessee was served with a notice determining the lease under
clause 5(a) relying on a breach of clause 3(b), the restoration requirements. The
lessee sought an injunction against this determination.
A settlement was reached with the lessee waiving specific breaches of the lease to that date. The settlement also included a series of actions to be undertaken by the lessee. Further requests for action have also been made by Agriculture and Landcare regarding weed control, tree protection and the reduction in the number of horses agisted. The lessee has responded to these requests.
Given the earlier settlement and lessees ongoing responses to requests by the Department, it is considered that the lessee has to date complied with clauses 2(ac) and 3(a-cc).
(7) The restorations required in Schedule "B" of the 1980 lease were to be completed
by September 1985. These arrangements were overtaken by the 1990 settlement. It
should be noted that it was the current principals of the Tuggeranong Pastoral
Company Pty. Ltd. who undertook to meet the terms of the 1990 settlement and
not the principals of the company during the period the works required in Schedule
"B" were to be undertaken up until 1985.
(8) When the current planning proposal for the Tuggeranong Homestead is resolved
and the ongoing tenancy arrangement determined, the Heritage Unit and Land
Division will thoroughly assess the condition of the property. Appropriate action
will be taken in relation to maintenance and restoration at that time.
(9) The Australian Capital Territory Government Solicitors Office advised at the time
that the lease was determined that it was unlikely that the decision would be
upheld by a court. The lease termination was withdrawn and a settlement reached
under which the lessee agreed to a specific restoration and refurbishment program.
3879
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .