Maraun v Chief Executive, Department of Lands

Pamela G. Maraun appealed against the unimproved valuation of her land, Lot 2 on Registered Plan 591443, Parish of Glengallan, which was assessed by the Department of Lands at $62,500 as at 30 June 1993. The land, covering 49.59 hectares, is located about 8 km north of Warwick and has access via the Womina Willowvale Road. The Department’s valuation was performed by a registered valuer, Mr A.B. Cowley, who assessed the land based on two comparable sales and its use as a rural homesite. Mrs Maraun argued that her land should be valued based on its use for primary production, similar to other farms in the area that had received a concessional valuation. She claimed that the land was bought for the purpose of establishing a primary production business, and while she had made some improvements, the land had not been actively used for farming due to severe drought conditions.

The central legal issue was the proper interpretation of the term "farming" under section 17 of the Valuation of Land Act 1944. Mrs Maraun contended that her land qualified for a concessional valuation because it was used for farming, which she defined as the grazing of livestock and cultivation of crops for profit. The court needed to determine whether the use of the land for grazing, even if on a small scale due to drought, met the statutory criteria for "farming." Specifically, the court had to assess whether the use of the land represented a dominant, significant, and substantial commercial purpose engaged in for profit on a continuous or repetitive basis.

The court found that Mrs Maraun had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that her land was used for farming in a manner that met the statutory definition. While she had purchased the land with the intention of using it for primary production, the court noted that little, if any, income had been generated from such activities at the time of valuation. The court further observed that the evidence did not support the notion that the land was being used for a dominant, significant, and substantial commercial purpose. Moreover, the court held that the merits of Mrs Maraun's appeal should be judged independently of the valuation of other lands, regardless of whether those valuations were correct. Given the evidence, including the professional valuation and the original purchase price, the court concluded that the unimproved value of the land was correctly assessed at $62,500. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the valuation affirmed.

The final orders of the court dismissed Mrs Maraun's appeal and affirmed the valuation of the chief executive.