Edgarhead Pty Ltd v Valuer-General

[2015] QLC 18

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Edgarhead Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2015] QLC 18

PARTIES:

Edgarhead Pty Ltd
(appellant)

v

Valuer-General
(respondent)

FILE NO:

LVA118-14

DIVISION:

General Division

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against annual valuation

DELIVERED ON:

29 June 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARD ON:

2 December 2014

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

PRESIDENT:

CAC MacDonald

ORDER:

1.        The appeal is dismissed.

2.        The site valuation of Lot 755 on Registered Plan 100372 in the County of Stanley, Parish of Woogaroo, is affirmed at Five Hundred and Ten Thousand Dollars ($510,000) as at 1 October 2013.   

CATCHWORDS:

Practice and Procedure – onus of proof

Valuation – valuation methodology – use of relevant sales – unimproved land and improved land

Valuation – Land Valuation Act 2010 – site value – improved land – evidentiary onus

Land Valuation Act 2010

Barnwell v Valuer-General (1990-91) 13 QLCR 13
Clough v The Valuer-General (1981-82) 8 QLCR 70
Cook v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2007] NSWLEC 136
Department of Natural Resources and Mines v Spender (2003) 24 QLCR 414
Gatfield v Valuer-General [2013] QLC 55
Grahn v Valuer-General (1992-93) 14 QLCR 327

Leichhardt Municipal Council v Seatainer Terminals Pty Ltd (1981) 48 LGRA 409
Maurici v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (2003) 212 CLR 111

Tow v Valuer-General (1978) 5 QLCR 378

APPEARANCES:

Mr M Woodhead, agent, for the appellant

Ms T Johnson, Senior Lawyer, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, for the respondent

Background

1. Edgarhead Pty Ltd (the appellant), the owner of land at 27 Alexandrina Circuit, Forest Lake, has appealed against the site valuation of that land as at 1 October 2013.  The valuation, issued by the respondent, the Valuer-General, under the provisions of the Land Valuation Act 2010 (the Act), determined the site value of the land at $510,000 as at 1 October 2013.  The appellant estimated the site value to be $400,000.

2. At the hearing of the appeal, the appellant was represented by Mr Mark Woodhead, who is the sole director of the appellant company and a self-employed computer consultant.  Mr Woodhead also gave evidence on behalf of the appellant.

3. The respondent was represented by Ms T Johnson, a senior lawyer with the Department of Natural Resources and Mines.  Evidence on behalf of the respondent was given by Mr CW Heslehurst, who is a certified practising valuer employed by the respondent.  Mr Heslehurst was responsible for making the valuation, the subject of the appeal.

4. The subject land has an area of 540 m².  Mr Heslehurst described the land as fronting a linear section of Council owned parkland along the banks of Forest Lake.  The Council land is grassed, with a concrete public footpath in place.  The rear boundary of the subject parcel is approximately 25m from the lakefront alignment of the parkland.  The land is a rectangular shaped allotment fronting Alexandrina Circuit.  The land falls gently from the street to the rear and the property is, generally, below road level.  The land is improved with a large, two storey, early 2000s brick…