Ogg v Department of Natural Resources and Mines

In the case of Ogg v Department of Natural Resources and Mines, the appellants, Ogg, McKenzie, Talkara, and Ayrshire Downs, contested the valuations of their land for the purpose of unimproved valuation under the Valuation of Land Act 1944. The matter was heard in the Queensland State Administrative Tribunal. The appellants argued that the valuations assigned by the chief executive were significantly lower than the market value due to the presence of a Prickly Acacia infestation on the land, which they claimed should be considered a disability that reduces the value of the land.

The tribunal was required to determine whether the valuations provided by the chief executive were appropriate, and if not, what the correct unimproved value of the land should be. This involved examining the valuation methodology used, including whether a factorised increase based on sales evidence and direct comparison with other valuations was appropriate, and considering the existing relativity between valuations. Additionally, the tribunal had to assess the impact of the Prickly Acacia infestation on the value of the land.

The tribunal found that the valuations provided by the chief executive did not adequately reflect the unimproved value of the land. The tribunal determined that the infestation of Prickly Acacia did constitute a disability that should be taken into account when valuing the land. It set aside the valuations provided by the chief executive and determined the unimproved value of the land for each appellant. The tribunal found the unimproved value of "McKenzie" to be Two Hundred and Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($225,000), "Talkara" to be Two Hundred and Ten Thousand Dollars ($210,000), and "Ayrshire Downs" to be Two Hundred and Forty Thousand Dollars ($240,000).

The tribunal allowed the appeals and set aside the valuations made by the chief executive, determining the unimproved value of the land for each appellant as specified.