David v Chief Executive, Department of Lands

Peter David challenged the Chief Executive, Department of Lands, regarding the unimproved valuation of a grazing lease. The key issue was whether the Chief Executive's valuation of $420,000 for the property as of 31 March 1992 was appropriate for calculating the annual rent for the lease starting 1 July 1993. David argued that the valuation was not supported by comparable sales, did not account for the land's disabilities, and was disproportionate to other properties in the district. David further contended that the valuation did not reflect the land's use.

The court examined the evidence from various witnesses, including two registered valuers, one representing each party. The evidence indicated that the land had limited potential for sugarcane cultivation due to soil quality and lack of irrigation. Despite the presence of about 45 hectares of land potentially suitable for sugarcane, the overall suitability for grazing was more evident. The court found that the valuer for David did not apply acceptable valuation principles, and the court could not accept that the Chief Executive's valuation was fully reflective of the land's grazing potential or the costs involved in developing the land.

Ultimately, the court concluded that the Chief Executive's valuation was too high and set aside the $420,000 valuation. The court determined the unimproved value at $175 per hectare, resulting in a valuation of $300,000 for rental assessment purposes.