Burke v Valuer-General

[2021] QLC 24

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Burke & Anor v Valuer-General [2021] QLC 24

PARTIES:

Peter Thomas Burke
(appellant)

Menora Developments Pty Ltd
(appellant)

v

Valuer-General
(respondent)

FILE NO:

LVA048-21

DIVISION:

General Division

PROCEEDING:

General application

DELIVERED ON:

23 July 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD ON:

20 July 2021

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

MEMBER:

PG Stilgoe OAM

ORDERS:

I determine:

the general application filed by the appellants on 4 May 2021 is dismissed;1.     

the general application filed by the Valuer-General on 1 June 2021 is upheld;2.     

the notice of appeal filed 12 April 2021 is struck out; and 3.     

any submissions seeking a costs order in this proceeding must be filed and served within 14 days of the publication of these reasons.4.     

CATCHWORDS:

REAL PROPERTY – VALUATION OF LAND – OBJECTIONS AND APPEALS – QUEENSLAND – NOTICE OF APPEAL – where sole ground of notice of appeal was that the respondent failed to deduct the cost of site improvements – where the appellants’ objection did not include site improvement costs as a ground of objection – where the respondent applied to strike out the appellants’ notice of appeal – where the Court dismissed the appellants’ general application – where the Court upheld the respondent’s general application – where the notice of appeal was struck out

Land Court Act 2000 s 7
Land Valuation Act 2010 s 41, s 42, s 43, s 113, s 143, s 144, s 145, s 147, s 150, s 151, s 155, s 157
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 r 375

APPEARANCES:

P T Burke, the appellant (self-represented)
C Channon, Senior Lawyer, In-house Legal, Department of Resources

1. Can the appellants, Peter Thomas Burke and Menora Developments Pty Ltd, file a notice of appeal about a site improvement deduction even though it was not a ground in their objection? If they can, then the site improvement deduction, if any, will apply to the issued valuation. If not, then the deduction, if any, will only apply to future valuations.

1. The appellants own land at Blackstump Court, Gilston. The Valuer-General’s site valuation for that property on 4 March 2020 was $3,400,000.

1. The appellants lodged an objection, submitting that the correct valuation should be $1,400,000. The Valuer-General issued a decision on objection on 3 March 2021 at $2,650,000.

1. The appellants appealed to this Court. The sole ground of the notice to appeal is that the Valuer-General failed to deduct the cost of site improvements.

1. The Valuer-General has applied to strike out the appellants’ notice of appeal on the basis that it has no jurisdiction. That is the application I am deciding today.

1. The Valuer-General submits that the notice of appeal does not relate to a decision of the Valuer-General because he did not make a decision about site improvements. He submits that the Land Valuation Act 2010 (“LVA”) has a framework for dealing with deduction applications and that, if the appellants have not complied with that framework, they cannot appeal.

What is the framework?

1. Under s…