Land and Environment Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Francis v Valuer General [2024] NSWLEC 1055 Hearing dates: 7 December 2023 Date of orders: 16 February 2024 Decision date: 16 February 2024 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Targett AC Decision: The Court orders that:
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) The valuation of the land being Lot 170 in DP 1094976, known as 41 Denman Street, Maitland, NSW as at 1 July 2022 is confirmed in the amount of $291,000.
(3) The exhibits are returned.
Catchwords: VALUATION OF LAND – appeal against valuations by Valuer-General – s 6A(1) of Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW)
Legislation Cited: Land and Environment Court Act 1979, s 19
Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW), ss 6A, 37
Maitland Local Environmental Plan 2011
Cases Cited: Richard Capuano v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWLEC 59
Hillman v Valuer General (1938) 14 LGR (NSW) 14
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rixta Francis (Applicant)
Valuer General (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
R Francis (Self-represented)(Applicant)
M Carpenter (Respondent)
N/A
Crown Solicitor’s Office (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2023/138680 Publication restriction: Nil
JUDGMENT
-
These Class 3 proceedings comprise an appeal under s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (Valuation Act) by Mrs Rixta Francis (the applicant) challenging the land value determined by the Valuer General (respondent) for the valuing year 1 July 2022 (Valuing Year) under the Valuation Act in respect of Lot 170 in DP 1094976 (also known as 41 Denman Street, Maitland, NSW) (Subject Land).
-
Pursuant to ss 6A of the Valuation Act, the respondent ascertained the land value of the Subject Land in the amount of $291,000 for the Valuing Year (Valuation).
-
On 29 January 2023, the applicant lodged an objection with the respondent in respect of the Valuation. On 11 April 2023, the respondent rejected the objection and upheld the Valuation. The applicant was dissatisfied with the determination of the objection and appealed pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation Act on 1 May 2023. The proceedings were therefore commenced within the time period prescribed by s 38 of the Valuation Act. The proceedings fall within Class 3 of the Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to s 19(b) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act).
-
The applicant’s position as to the correct valuation of the Subject Land in the Valuing Year changed over the course of the matter. In the applicant’s Valuation Objection Form dated 29 January 2023 (attached to the applicant’s Class 3 Application filed 1 May 2023 (Exhibit 1, Tab 1)), the suggested land value was $145,500. In the applicant’s Grounds of Objection (attached to the respondent’s Statement of Facts filed 21 July 2023 (Exhibit 1, Tab 3)), the applicant contended that the land value of the Subject Land as at the Valuing Year was “around $1,000/m2” (which would equate to $151,900). During the hearing, the applicant contended that the land value was “around $50,000…” however, “could even be as low as $30,000”.
Background
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Francis v Valuer General and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2024] NSWLEC 1055
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the valuation of the land was appropriate, given the evidence presented. The court needed to consider the valuation process undertaken by the respondent, as well as any factors that may have influenced the valuation. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the appellant had provided sufficient evidence to support their claim that the valuation was incorrect.
The court found that the respondent had undertaken a thorough and appropriate valuation process, taking into account all relevant factors. The court was satisfied that the evidence presented did not support the appellant's contention that the valuation was incorrect. As such, the court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the valuation of the land as set by the respondent. The court found that the appellant had not provided sufficient evidence to support their claim, and therefore the valuation should stand.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Court orders that:
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) The valuation of the land being Lot 170 in DP 1094976, known as 41 Denman Street, Maitland, NSW as at 1 July 2022 is confirmed in the amount of $291,000.
(3) The exhibits are returned.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.