Dunsdon v Department of Natural Resources and Mines

In the case of Dunsdon v Department of Natural Resources and Mines, the primary dispute was regarding the determination of the unimproved value of certain land as per the Valuation of Land Act 1944. The matter was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal, where the appellant, Dunsdon, contested the valuation issued by the chief executive of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.

The legal issues before the court revolved around the appropriate method for valuing the land's unimproved value, particularly considering the presence of a Waterworks licence and the lack of comparable local sales evidence. The court had to determine the relevance of sales evidence from recognised locations when applied to a remote location, the impact of the Waterworks licence on the land's value, and the appropriate methodology for incorporating the added value of such a licence into the valuation process.

The court found that the chief executive's valuation did not adequately account for the unimproved value of the land, particularly in light of the Waterworks licence. The court held that the Waterworks licence added value to the land, but that the methodology used to incorporate this value into the overall valuation was flawed. The court also noted the lack of local sales evidence and the potential premium that could be attributed to the land due to its irrigable nature. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the chief executive's valuation was set aside. The unimproved value of the land as at 1 October 2001 was determined to be One Hundred and One Thousand Dollars ($101,000).