Jensen v Valuer-General

The Jensens appealed the valuation of their property against the Valuer-General, contesting the valuation of $640,000 set in 2020, which they deemed excessive. Their objection to the Land Court resulted in a reduced valuation of $615,000, yet they remained unsatisfied with this outcome. Consequently, they escalated their appeal to the Land Appeal Court, seeking a valuation of $400,000. The legal issues at hand were whether the court erred in its reliance on the expert valuer’s evidence, the weight assigned to comparison sale number 1, the interpretation of sections 45 and 46 of the Land Valuation Act, the determination of the highest and best use of the Jensens’ property, and whether the court’s decision was influenced by any perceived bias.

The Land Appeal Court examined the evidence and the reasoning applied by the Land Court. It was noted that the Land Court had a duty to assess the valuation using the best available evidence, even when such evidence was imprecise. However, the court identified an error in the Land Court's decision to account for a rise in property value between 2018 and 2020, as the expert valuer had opined that the market was steady during this period. This error meant the reduction made in the valuation was insufficient. The Land Appeal Court also assessed the weight given to comparison sale number 1, the interpretation of the relevant sections of the Land Valuation Act, and the determination of the highest and best use of the Jensens’ property. The court found no evidence of bias influencing the Land Court’s decision.

The Land Appeal Court found that the Land Court erred in several respects, leading to the reduction in valuation being inadequate. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal regarding the valuation amount, reducing the valuation to $600,000, and ordered the Valuer-General to pay the Jensens’ costs for the appeal. The court dismissed the appeal regarding the costs decision, and ordered the Jensens to pay the Valuer-General’s costs for that part of the appeal.