Site goodwill is that goodwill which cannot be transferred to another site nearby and therefore, the proprietor is compensated for that loss. However, site goodwill is a difficult concept to prove in practice and has engendered a great deal of debate in the courts. The valuer should first of all determine the total value of goodwill if any, and then try to apportion that amount between site and personal goodwill. This can be very difficult. Examples of site goodwill awarded by the courts are as follows:

1. Comm of Tax v Williamson 7 The Valuer 306- chemist shop at Berala, Sydney.
2. Bickle v Comm of Main Roads 17 The Valuer 209 - bakery and shop premises at Drummoyne, Sydney.
3. Eastaway v The Commonwealth - engineering business
4. Min for Homes v Lazarus 2 The Valuer 209 - premises owned by a licensed victualler.

It is submitted that there is little evidence of site goodwill in practice except for the lease examples given above. Almost all the court cases which have purported to assess an amount of compensation for site goodwill have in reality, measured an advantage which the land or site enjoys and therefore, was part of the land value. The compensation awarded was subject to the error of "double accounting. For example, clearly in Bickle's case the "site goodwill" was part of the commercial land value.