Dunning v Valuer-General

The Land Court of Queensland heard an appeal by Barrie John Dunning against the Valuer-General concerning the annual valuation of his rural land under the Land Valuation Act 2010. Dunning contested the Valuer-General's valuation of his 139.5173 ha of farming land, set at $355,000 as at 1 October 2010. He argued that the correct valuation should be $200,000, citing erosion damage due to nearby gravel extraction and the impact of major flooding in early 2011. The central legal issues revolved around the appropriate methodology for determining the land's unimproved value and whether the Valuer-General's valuation process was justified.

The court assessed the evidence presented by both parties, focusing on the sales used for comparison and the method of valuation. Dunning's expert, Mr Horswood, valued the land at $185,000 as at 1 October 2011, but did not provide an opinion on the value as at 1 October 2010. His reliance on a highly improved sale, which was not relevant to the date in question, undermined his credibility. Conversely, the Valuer-General's expert, Mr Clark, provided a detailed valuation report, using four sales to assess the unimproved value of the land, and concluded that the valuation of $355,000 was appropriate. The court found that Mr Clark's valuation was supported by credible evidence and adhered to the established principles of valuation, particularly the preference for sales of unimproved or lightly improved land.

In dismissing Dunning's appeal, the court confirmed the Valuer-General's valuation of $355,000 as at 1 October 2010. The court found that Dunning's evidence did not substantiate his claim that the land should be valued at $200,000, and that the Valuer-General's valuation was adequately supported by the evidence. The court concluded that the Valuer-General's approach was in line with the statutory requirements and judicial precedents, and thus, the appeal was unsuccessful.