Putland v Chief Executive, Department of Lands

Rex H Putland and Fay C Putland appealed against the categorisation of their land for differential general rating purposes by the Laidley Shire Council. The land, consisting of three parcels, was placed in Category 3, which includes vacant and rural residential land or land used for dwellings or outbuildings on rural residential land. The appellants contended that their land should have been categorised as Category 5, which encompasses land used for primary production. The court had to determine whether the appellants' land qualified for Category 5 based on the criteria set by the council.

The court assessed whether the appellants' use of the land met the definition of "farming" as per section 11(9) of the Valuation of Land Act 1944, which requires a significant and substantial commercial purpose or character, engaged in for profit on a continuous or repetitive basis. The evidence showed that the land was used for grazing cattle, and the appellants intended to make their activities a viable venture. However, the court considered the financial viability of the enterprise, the water problems, the separation of the properties, and the substantial losses incurred over the past three years. The court found that the appellants' venture did not meet the criteria for Category 5 as it did not demonstrate a significant and substantial commercial purpose or character, and the losses indicated that it was unlikely to become a viable business in the future.

The court concluded that the appellants' land did not qualify for Category 5 and affirmed the decision of the Chief Executive, Department of Lands, to include the three parcels in Category 3 of the differential general rating scheme. The appeals were dismissed.