Agreed. There would be no end if the treasury compensated people for losses because of people's commercial losses.
If management run a business badly then they loose invetsor's profit or even the capital invested.
But if someone's action/inaction causes a business to loose income/profit then typically they sue.
A difference between suing an individual or company verses the government is you know that if you win the case against the government, the govt. has deep pockets. No point in suing for damages if the person hasn't got a house or insurance. You only waste more of your money.
eg: The NSW govt. decided to resume some harbour side land (ex Caltex site I think). But before they did, Caltex entered into an agreement to sell the land. And although it was zoned for a refinery it had the potential to be rezones for residential flats.
So the intending purchaser (emphasis on "intension"to purchase) argued that had they purchased and had the realistic expectation that they would be allowed to build X number of Units, and with an reasonable expectation they'd make say $100K per Unit (only guessing these figures) they got I think $40 million compensation from NSW govt. which also had to pay Caltex the market value.
What a cash cow government can be! $40 million for doing vertually NOTHING!
So it is just a matter of the operation of the law.
CAZ Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Not Held
