AJ Turnbull v Department of Natural Resources and Water

[2008] QLC 146

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

AJ Turnbull v Department of Natural Resources and Water [2008] QLC 0146

PARTIES:

Andrew James Turnbull
(appellant)  

v.

Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water
(respondent)

FILE NOS:

RV2006/0216 and RV2006/0217

DIVISION:

Land Court of Queensland – General Division

PROCEEDINGS:

Appeals against rental valuations.

DELIVERED ON:

16 July 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD AT:

Blackall

MEMBER:

Mr JJ Trickett, President

ORDERS:

1.   In appeal RV2006/0216, the appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the "Narada" Road Licence 272 for rental purposes as at 1 October 2005 is affirmed at Three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($3,800).

2.   In appeal RV2006/0217, the appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the "Narada" Permit to Occupy 218547 for rental purposes as at 1 October 2005 is affirmed at Three Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($3,700).

CATCHWORDS:

Unimproved values – for rental purposes - small Road Licence and Permit to Occupy -  parts of grazing property at Tambo – insufficient evidence adduced by appellant - failure to rebut statutory presumption of correctness - Valuation of Land Act 1944.

APPEARANCES:

Mr A Boyd, agent, for the appellant.
Mr W Isdale, Executive Legal Consultant, Crown Law, for the respondent.

1. These are appeals by a landowner in the then Shire of Tambo against the unimproved values applied to his land by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water (the Department) under the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1944 (the Act).

2. Mr AJ Turnbull is the owner of part of a grazing property known as "Narada", situated in close proximity to the town of Tambo.  The appeals against the valuations of the various components of "Narada" have been separately determined.  The present appeals concern the valuations of Road Licence 272, containing an area of 16.04 ha and the valuation of Permit to Occupy 218547, containing an area of 15.6 ha. 

3. As at 1 October 2005, the Department applied unimproved values of $3,800 and $3,700 respectively to those areas.  Mr Turnbull appealed to the Land Court against those valuations, advising that his estimates of the unimproved values are $2,800 and $2,600 respectively.

4. The only evidence in relation to each of these appeals is contained in Mr Turnbull’s statement.  According to Mr Turnbull, the Department’s previous valuation of the Road Licence made as at 1 October 2001 was $87.28/ha, whereas the valuation appealed against is $236.91/ha, an increase of 172%.  In the case of the Permit to Occupy, the Department’s previous valuation as at 1 October 2001 was $83.34/ha, while the valuation appealed against is $237.18/ha, an increase of 185%.  Mr Turnbull contends that there must be "huge premiums" attaching to these valuations for location and small size.  He also refers to the water disability, irregular shape and bad access of each of these parcels of land.

5. No evidence in relation to these valuations was given by the Department.  However, under the provisions of the Act, the valuations are deemed to be correct until proven otherwise.  The appellant has the onus and burden of proving that they are incorrect. 

6. In these cases, there is simply insufficient evidence for the appellant to discharge the burden of proof.  Therefore, the appellant has failed to rebut the statutory presumption of correctness and both appeals must be dismissed.

Orders

1.In appeal RV2006/0216, the appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the "Narada" Road Licence 272 for rental purposes as at 1 October 2005 is affirmed at Three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($3,800).

2.In appeal RV2006/0217, the appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the "Narada" Permit to Occupy 218547 for rental purposes as at 1 October 2005 is affirmed at Three Thousand Seven Hundred Dollars ($3,700).

JJ TRICKETT

PRESIDENT OF THE LAND COURT