JMK Investments Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources
Case
•
[1998] QLC 55
•22 May 1998
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
JMK Investments Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources [1998] QLC 55
[1998] QLC 55
22 May 1998
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Land Court of Queensland heard an appeal by JMK Investments Pty Ltd against the Chief Executive of the Department of Natural Resources regarding the valuation of a property at 1396 Creek Road, Carina, Brisbane. The central issue was whether the Court had jurisdiction to hear the merits of the case due to a delay in lodging the notice of appeal against the annual valuation. The appeal was lodged on 18 September 1997, beyond the 28-day statutory period specified under the Valuation of Land Act 1944. The appellant argued that the delay was due to the mail passing through their accountant before reaching them, which they claimed was part of their "ordinary course of post". The respondent contended that the statutory period was mandatory and not subject to extension.
The Court considered the statutory provisions governing the lodging of appeals and noted that the ordinary course of post referred to the postal services responsible for delivering the mail from the Chief Executive to the appellant's address, not any subsequent on-forwarding by the appellant's accountant. The Court held that the Land Court, being a court of statutory creation, had no inherent jurisdiction to extend the statutory period for lodging an appeal. The Court found that the delay did not qualify as an undue delay in the transmission of mail in the ordinary course of post, as required by the Act. Consequently, the Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal on its merits and struck out the appeal.
The Court considered the statutory provisions governing the lodging of appeals and noted that the ordinary course of post referred to the postal services responsible for delivering the mail from the Chief Executive to the appellant's address, not any subsequent on-forwarding by the appellant's accountant. The Court held that the Land Court, being a court of statutory creation, had no inherent jurisdiction to extend the statutory period for lodging an appeal. The Court found that the delay did not qualify as an undue delay in the transmission of mail in the ordinary course of post, as required by the Act. Consequently, the Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal on its merits and struck out the appeal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Limitation Periods
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
0