Fawckner v Department of Natural Resources and Water

In the Land Court of Queensland, Robert Dale Fawckner (appellant) appealed the unimproved valuation of his property "Bonnie Downs" as at 1 October 2005, set by the Chief Executive of the Department of Natural Resources and Water (respondent). The court's primary task was to determine whether the valuation of $120/ha was excessive and to decide if it should be aligned with the valuations of similar properties in the adjoining Aramac Shire. The court also had to consider the admissibility of evidence from the appellant's agent, Alistair Boyd, and whether the sales relied upon by the Department were at market value.

The court found that the valuation of "Bonnie Downs" was excessive compared with the valuation of "Dahlia", a property that adjoins "Bonnie Downs" and is similar in terms of land quality. The court concluded that the valuation of "Bonnie Downs" should be $110/ha, resulting in a total valuation of $2,869,000. The court also highlighted the lack of coordination between the valuations of properties in the Winton and Aramac Shires, which led to an undesirable lack of relativity between valuations in the two areas.

The court allowed the appeal, set aside the Chief Executive's valuation, and determined the unimproved value of "Bonnie Downs" as at 1 October 2005 to be Two Million, Eight Hundred and Sixty-nine Thousand Dollars ($2,869,000). The court could not correct the lack of relativity between the valuations in the two Shires but urged the Department to address the issue to avoid an inequitable and unfair situation.