Bratton v Valuer General

[2024] NSWLEC 1054

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Bratton v Valuer General [2024] NSWLEC 1054

Hearing dates:

Conciliation conference on 23 November and 13 December 2024

Date of orders:

20 February 2024

Decision date:

20 February 2024

Jurisdiction:

Class 3

Before:

Targett AC

Decision:

The Court orders that:

(1) Appeal allowed.

(2) The land value of the property legally described as Lot 27 in Deposited Pan 5275, known as 109 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Stanwell Park NSW 2509, is determined as $1,600,000 for the valuing year 1 July 2022, in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

Catchwords:

VALUATION OF LAND – appeal against valuations by Valuer-General – s 6A(1) of Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW) – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties

Legislation Cited:

Valuation of Land Act 1916, ss 6A, 37, 38, 40

Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 19, 34

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Stephanie-Kate Bratton (First applicant)
Adam John Venn (Second Applicant)
Valuer General (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
S Bratton (Self-represented) (First Applicant)
A Venn (Self-represented) (Second Applicant)
M Carpenter (Respondent)

Solicitors:
N/A
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2023/257025

Publication restriction:

No

JUDGMENT

1. COMMISSIONER: These Class 3 proceedings comprise an appeal under s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (Valuation Act) by Ms Stephanie-Kate Bratton and Mr Adam John Venn (together, the applicants) challenging the land value determined by the Valuer General (respondent) for the valuing year 1 July 2022 (Valuing Year) under the Valuation Act in respect of Lot 27 in DP 5275, also known as 109 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Stanwell Park NSW 2509 (Subject Land).

2. Pursuant to s 6A of the Valuation Act, the respondent ascertained the land value of the Subject Land in the amount of $1,810,000 for the Valuing Year (Valuation).

3. On 26 March 2023, the applicant made an objection to the respondent in respect of the Valuation. On 28 July 2023, the respondent rejected the objection and upheld the Valuation. The applicant was dissatisfied with the determination of the objection and appealed pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation Act on 13 August 2023. The proceedings were therefore commenced within the time period prescribed by s 38 of the Valuation Act.

4. The proceedings fall within Class 3 of the Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to s 19(b) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act).

5. In the applicants’ Class 3 application, the applicants contended that the Valuation was too high and that the valuation of the Subject Land as at the Valuing Year should be determined at $1,178,774.

6. The Court arranged a s 34 conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the LEC Act between the parties, which was held on 23 November and 13 December 2023. I presided over the conciliation conference.

7. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of the decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. The parties provided a signed s 34 agreement and jurisdictional statement on 20 December 2023.

8. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal and determining the value of the Subject Land as at the Valuing Year in the amount of $1,600,000 pursuant to s 6A of the Valuation Act.

9. Pursuant to s 40 of the Valuation Act, on an appeal, the Land and Environment Court may relevantly do any one or more of the following –

1. confirm or revoke the decision to which the appeal relates,

2. make a decision in place of the decision to which the appeal relates,

3. remit the matter to the Valuer-General for determination in accordance with the Court’s finding or decision.

10. 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. In making the orders to give effect to the agreement between the parties, I was not required to, and have not, made any merit assessment of the issues that were originally in dispute between the parties.

11. The Court notes that each party is to bear its own costs of the proceedings.

Orders

12. The Court orders that:

1. The appeal is allowed.

2. The land value of the property legally described as Lot 27 in Deposited Plan 5275, known as 109 Lawrence Hargrave Drive, Stanwell Park NSW 2508, is determined as $1,600,000 for the valuing year 1 July 2022, in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

N Targett

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********