Nimmo v Department of Natural Resources and Mines

Nimmo, the appellant, brought an appeal against the Department of Natural Resources and Mines, the respondent, concerning the valuation of certain residential land in Queensland. The primary dispute was over the appropriate method for determining the unimproved value of the land, taking into account various factors, including heritage restrictions and the scarcity of comparable sales. The case was heard in the Queensland Land Court.

The court was tasked with determining the correct legal approach to valuing land subject to heritage restrictions, specifically under the Queensland Heritage Act 1992, and whether it was appropriate to use improved sales to determine the unimproved value. The court also needed to clarify the impact of views on the valuation process and whether the capitalisation method was suitable for valuing the land given the absence of proven annualised costs. Additionally, the court had to consider the application of statutory provisions, particularly section 17 of the Valuation of Land Act 1944, to the valuation of residential land.

The court found that the Chief Executive's valuation was not in accordance with the law, particularly regarding the impact of the heritage restrictions on the land's value. The court held that the use of improved sales to determine unimproved value was not appropriate due to the scarcity of vacant sales. The court also determined that the capitalisation method was not suitable because there were no proven annualised costs available. Furthermore, the court held that the Chief Executive had not properly applied the statutory provisions in determining the land's value. The court concluded that the unimproved value of the land should be set at Three Hundred and Sixty Thousand Dollars ($360,000).

The court set aside the unimproved value determined by the Chief Executive and determined that the unimproved value of Lots 16 and 17 on RP 11691 should be Three Hundred and Sixty Thousand Dollars ($360,000). The appeal was upheld in favour of the appellant.