Horsfield v Valuer-General of NSW

[2024] NSWLEC 1281

Land and Environment Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Horsfield v Valuer-General of NSW [2024] NSWLEC 1281

Hearing dates:

Conciliation conference on 15 May 2024

Date of orders:

29 May 2024

Decision date:

29 May 2024

Jurisdiction:

Class 3

Before:

Peatman AC

Decision:

The Court orders:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) The Land Value of 30 Post Office Lane Crackenback, NSW 2627 being the whole of the land in Lot 5 Deposited Plan 808488, as at the valuing year 1 July 2022 is amended to $1,390,000 in accordance with ss 40(1)(b) and 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

Catchwords:

VALUATION OF LAND – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders

Legislation Cited:

Land and Environment Court Act 1979, ss 19, 34

Valuation of land Act 1916, ss 29, 35, 35B, 35C, 37, 38

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Helen Patricia Horsfield (Applicant)
Valuer-General of New South Wales (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
H Horsfield (Self-Represented) (Applicant)
R Ghanem (Solicitor) (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor for NSW (Respondent)

File Number(s):

2024/28310

Publication restriction:

Nil

Judgment

1. COMMISSIONER: This is an appeal pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (Valuation Act) against the Valuer-General of NSW’s determination of objection dated 20 December 2023 for land owned by the Applicant.

1. 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).

2. The statutory power or function to be exercised in determining the proceedings are s 34(3) of the LEC Act and s 40 of the Valuation Act.

Background

2. On 23 March 2023, pursuant to s 29 of the Valuation Act, the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue issued a Notice of Valuation to the Applicant for 30 Post Office Lane, Crackenback NSW, being the whole of the land in Lot 5 Deposited Plan 804488 (the Land) in relation to the 2022 valuation year. The valuation notice determined an Issued Land Value of $1,690,000 for the Land in the 2022 valuation year.

3. On 11 May 2023 the Applicant lodged an objection to the Issued Land Value pursuant to s 29(3A) of the Valuation Act within the prescribed time for lodging an objection pursuant to s 35(1)(b) of the Valuation Act.

4. On 20 December 2023 the Valuer-General allowed the Applicant’s objection pursuant to s 35B of the Valuation Act, and issued a Notice of Determination to the Application as required by s 35C of the Valuation Act. The Issued Land Value for the 2022 valuation year was reduced by the Valuer-General to $1,500,000.

5. On 23 January 2024, the Applicant lodged an appeal commencing these proceedings pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation Act, in accordance with the 60-day time period imposed by s 38(1) of the Valuation Act.

6. The Land Value contended by the Applicant in these proceedings was $1,355,000 and the Land Value contended by the Valuer-General was $1,500,000.

7. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the LEC Act between the parties, which was held on 15 May 2024. I presided over the conciliation conference.

8. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. The parties agreed the appeal should be upheld, and that the Issued Land Value for the valuation date of 1 July 2022 to be $1,390,000.

9. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision if the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties’ decision involves the Court exercising the function under subs 40(1)(b) of the Valuation Act. The jurisdictional pre-requisites that must be satisfied before this function can be exercised are as set out above.

10. Section 40(1)(b) of the Valuation Act provides:

40 Powers of the Land and Environment Court on appeal

(1) On an appeal, the Land and Environment Court may do any one or more of the following –

……

(b) make a decision in place of the decision to which the appeal relates.

11. I am satisfied that the parties’ decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. The relevant steps in relation to giving a Notice of Valuation, objection, determination of objection, and subsequent appeal to this Court have all been carried out pursuant to the relevant provisions set out above in the Valuation Act.

12. As the parties’ decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ decision.

13. The Court notes that each party will bear its own costs.

14. The Court orders:

1. The appeal is upheld; and

2. The Land Value of 30 Post Office Lane Crackenback NSW 2627 being the whole of the land in Lot 5 Deposited Plan 808488, as at the valuing year 1 July 2022 is amended to $1,390,000 in accordance with ss 40(1)(b) and 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

M Peatman

Acting Commissioner of the Court

**********

Decision last updated: 29 May 2024