Mills v Department of Natural Resources and Water

Shane T Mills, the appellant, has appealed against the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Water, the respondent, concerning the annual valuation and rental valuation of his property, Amelia Downs. The case was heard in the Land Court of Queensland, General Division. The appellant, represented by Mr A Boyd, contested the unimproved value applied to his land by the Department under the Valuation of Land Act 1944. The respondent was represented by Mr W Isdale, Executive Legal Consultant, Crown Law.

The key legal issue was whether the Department's unimproved value of $1,000,000, or $99.49/ha, for the property as at 1 October 2005, was excessive, and whether the Department had failed to take into account and make proper allowance for various matters, or to apply the correct principles of valuation. The appellant argued that the valuation was excessive due to the property's inferior carrying capacity, prickly acacia infestation, and lower valuation of nearby properties. The Department contended that the valuation was appropriate, considering the property's carrying capacity, infestation, and comparison with other properties in the area.

The court accepted the registered valuer's opinion, Mr DA Routh, who had inspected the property and other properties in the area. Mr Routh classified the country and assessed the carrying capacity, concluding that the prickly acacia infestation did not warrant an allowance. The court found that the Department's valuation of $86.56/ha was appropriate, in conformity with the Court determinations made to nearby properties. The court determined the unimproved value of the property at $86.56/ha, amounting to $870,000.

The appeals were allowed, the valuations of the Chief Executive were set aside, and the unimproved value of "Amelia Downs" for rating and rental purposes as at 1 October 2005 was determined at Eight Hundred and Seventy Thousand Dollars ($870,000).