ROBERTSON and VALUER GENERAL [2007] WASAT 213

Jurisdiction:	STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL	Citation No:	[2007] WASAT 213
Act:	VALUATION OF LAND ACT 1978 (WA)
Case No:	DR:424/2006	Heard:	21 AUGUST 2007
Coram:	MR D R PARRY (SENIOR MEMBER) MR D LIGGINS (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)	Delivered:	27/08/07
No of pages:	18	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Unimproved value of Lots 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 and 120 on Diagram 12049, Lot 130 on Diagram 12335/1, Lot 138 on Diagram 12378, Lots 140, 141, 142 and 143 on Diagram 12375 and Lot 2 on Diagram 14147 at Stoneville Road, Cameron Road and Joseph Road, Gidgegannup as at 1 August 2003 was $3 698 000
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DONALD EUAN ROBERTSON VALUER GENERAL
Catchwords:	Valuation of land – Unimproved value – Site value – Adjoining land in common ownership – Single group value – Rural land in Perth Metropolitan Region used for grazing purposes – Thirteen adjoining lots each with separate certificate of title and road access in common ownership – Gross realisation of lots discounted by an appropriate percentage ascertained from single sales involving more than one lot – Appropriate profit and risk factor – Whether a single sale of a single lot which was subsequently subdivided into four lots is of assistance in determining appropriate profit and risk factor and discount for single group value – Default Multi Lot Table applied
Legislation:	Local Government Act 1995 (WA), s 6.28(1), s 6.28(2) State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 27(1) Valuation of Land Act 1978 (WA), s 4(1), s 18, s 19, s 32, s 32(7), s 33, s 36A(1)
Case References:	Nil
Orders	On the application heard on 21 August 2007 by Senior Member David Parry and Senior Sessional Member David Liggins, it is on 27 August 2007 ordered that:,1. The application for review is dismissed.,2. The unimproved value of the land in Lots 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 and 120 on Diagram 12049, Lot 30 on Diagram 12335/1, Lot 138 on Diagram 12378, Lots 140, 141, 142 and 143 on Diagram 12375, and Lot 2 on Diagram 14147 at Stoneville Road, Cameron Road and Joseph Road, Gidgegannup as at 1 August 2003 is $3 698 000.,3. Exhibit 9 shall be returned to the applicant.

JURISDICTION : STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL STREAM : DEVELOPMENT & RESOURCES ACT : VALUATION OF LAND ACT 1978 (WA) CITATION : ROBERTSON and VALUER GENERAL [2007] WASAT 213 MEMBER : MR D R PARRY (SENIOR MEMBER)

MR D LIGGINS (SENIOR SESSIONAL MEMBER)

HEARD : 21 AUGUST 2007 DELIVERED : 27 AUGUST 2007 FILE NO/S : DR 424 of 2006 BETWEEN : DONALD EUAN ROBERTSON

Applicant

AND

VALUER GENERAL

Respondent

Catchwords:

Valuation of land – Unimproved value – Site value – Adjoining land in common ownership – Single group value – Rural land in Perth Metropolitan Region used for grazing purposes – Thirteen adjoining lots each with separate certificate of title and road access in common ownership – Gross realisation of lots discounted by an appropriate…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading ROBERTSON and VALUER GENERAL

Details

AGLC: Robertson and Valuer General [2007] WASAT 213
Case: [2007] WASAT 213
Decision Date: 27 AUGUST 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter between Robertson and the Valuer General was heard by Senior Member David Parry and Senior Sessional Member David Liggins in the Valuation Review Board. The dispute centred on the valuation of certain land parcels in Perth's Metropolitan Region, used for grazing, which were part of adjoining lots under common ownership. The critical issue was the unimproved value of these lots, specifically whether they should be assessed individually or as part of a single group. The applicants argued for a lower valuation based on a single group value, while the Valuer General maintained that individual valuations were appropriate.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate method for valuing the land parcels, considering whether they should be assessed individually or as part of a single group. A key point of contention was the relevance of a single sale of a lot that was subsequently subdivided in determining the profit and risk factors. The court also had to decide on the appropriate discount for the single group value and whether the Default Multi Lot Table should be applied.

The court ruled in favour of the Valuer General, dismissing the applicants' review application. The court found that the land parcels should be valued individually, rejecting the argument for a single group valuation. The court held that the sale of a single lot, which was later subdivided, did not provide sufficient evidence to determine the profit and risk factors for the group. Additionally, the court determined that the Default Multi Lot Table was appropriately applied in this case.

The final order of the court was to dismiss the application for review, confirming the unimproved value of the specified land parcels as determined by the Valuer General. The court also ordered that a particular exhibit be returned to the applicant.

Orders

Orders of the court

On the application heard on 21 August 2007 by Senior Member David Parry and Senior Sessional Member David Liggins, it is on 27 August 2007 ordered that: 1. The application for review is dismissed. 2. The unimproved value of the land in Lots 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 and 120 on Diagram 12049, Lot 30 on Diagram*12335/1, Lot 138 on Diagram 12378, Lots 140, 141, 142 and 143 on Diagram 12375, and Lot 2 on Diagram 14147 at Stoneville Road, Cameron Road and Joseph Road, Gidgegannup as at 1 August 2003 is $3 698 000. 3. Exhibit 9 shall be returned to the applicant.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.