Balzola v Valuer General

[2021] NSWLEC 1493

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

• Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation:

Balzola v Valuer General [2021] NSWLEC 1493

Hearing dates:

Conciliation Conference on 18 August 2021

Date of orders:

27 August 2021

Decision date:

27 August 2021

Jurisdiction:

Class 3

Before:

Kempthorne AC

Decision:

The Court orders:

(1) In the proceedings 2021/159477:

(a) The Appeal is upheld.

(b) The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2018 be determined in the amount of $5,100,000.

(2)    In the proceedings 2021/159478:

(a)   The Appeal is upheld.

(b)    The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2019 be determined in the amount of $5,975,000.

(3)    In the proceedings 2021/159479:

(a)    The Appeal is dismissed.

(b)    The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2020 be confirmed in the determined amount of $7,240,000.

(4)   Each party agrees to pay their own costs.

Catchwords:

VALUATION OF LAND – objections to issued Land Values – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders

Legislation Cited:

Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 34

Valuation of Land Act 1916, ss 6A,14A, 34, 35B, 35C, 37

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Robert Balzola (Applicant)
Valuer General of New South Wales (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
M Seymour (Applicant)
A Pearman (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Stewart Cuddy & Mockler (Applicant)
Crown Solicitors Office NSW (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2021/159477
2021/159478
2021/159479

Publication restriction:

Nil

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: This Class 3 application arises from the disallowed objections and subsequent appeals by the Applicant pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (Valuation Act) in respect of the Land Values for the Valuing Years 1 July 2018, 1 July 2019 and 1 July 2020 of Lot 39B in DP 8979 known as 141 Byron Road, Leppington (the Property).

Jurisdiction Pre-requisites

2. The Valuer General of New South Wales (VG) issued Notices of Valuation with the following Land Values to the Applicant in accordance with s 14A of the Valuation Act:

Valuing Year 1 July 2018

   $6,130,000.

Valuing Year 1 July 2019

   $6,680,000.

Valuing Year 1 July 2020

   $7,420,000.

3. The Applicant lodged objections to the issued Land Values pursuant to s 34 of the Valuation Act.

4. The VG disallowed the Applicant’s objections pursuant to s 35B and issued a Notices of Determination as required by s 35C of the Valuation Act to the Applicant.

5. The Applicant’s solicitor lodged Appeals to the disallowance of the objections pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation Act in this Court on 3 June 2021.

6. The Land Values contended by the Applicant in his Appeals were as follows:

Valuing Year 1 July 2018

   $4,010,000.

Valuing Year 1 July 2019

   $4,770,000.

Valuing Year 1 July 2020

   $5,610,000.

7. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) between the parties on 18 August 2021.

8. I presided over the conciliation conference.

s 34 Agreement

9. During the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties (being a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions).

10. The terms of decision agreed to by the parties are:

1. In the proceedings 2021/159477:

1. The Appeal is upheld.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2018 be determined in the amount of $5,100,000.

2. In the proceedings 2021/159478:

1. The Appeal is upheld.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2019 be determined in the amount of $5,975,000.

3. In the proceedings 2021/159479:

1. The Appeal is dismissed.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2020 be confirmed in the determined amount of $7,240,000.

4. Each party agrees to pay their own costs.

11. I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act.

12. As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.

Orders

13. The Court orders:

1. In the proceedings 2021/159477:

1. The Appeal is upheld.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2018 be determined in the amount of $5,100,000.

2. In the proceedings 2021/159478:

1. The Appeal is upheld.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2019 be determined in the amount of $5,975,000.

3. In the proceedings 2021/159479:

1. The Appeal is dismissed.

2. The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2020 be confirmed in the determined amount of $7,240,000.

4. Each party agrees to pay their own costs.

…………………………

P Kempthorne

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********

Amendments

08 September 2021 - Pursuant to UCPR r 36.17, and by consent of the parties, the Court amends Order (3) in this Judgment, by replacing the determined amount being “$7,420,000” to “$7,240,000”, and as a result Order (3) should read as follows

“(3) In the proceedings 2021/159479:

(a) The Appeal is dismissed.

(b) The Land Value for Lot 39B in DP 8979 for the Valuing Year 1 July 2020 be confirmed in the determined amount of $7,240,000.”