Souter v Valuer General

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:

Souter v Valuer General [2006] NSWLEC 588

PARTIES:

APPLICANT
John Bedford Souter

RESPONDENT
Valuer General

FILE NUMBER(S):

30082 of 2006

CORAM:

Murrell C

KEY ISSUES:

Valuation of Land :- Comparable land sales, adjustment for relevant factors including views, aspect, proximity to beach and movement in the market from base date

LEGISLATION CITED:

Valuation of Land Act 1916
Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan

CASES CITED:

Pyramid Pacific Pty Limited v Ku-ring-gai Council [2006] NSWLEC 522

DATES OF HEARING:

28-29/08/2006

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE:

09/06/2006

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT
Mr J Souter, self represented

RESPONDENT
Ms A Pearman, barrister
Instructed by: Ms Valentine
Of: Crown Solicitor's Office

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Murrell C

6 September 2006

30082 of 2006 John Bedford Souter v Valuer General

JUDGMENT

This determination was given extemporaneously
and it has been edited prior to publication

1 This is a verbal judgment for a matter that I heard in Nowra last week. The applicant has appealed under s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (the Act) against the Valuer General’s valuation for the property known as 5 Silver Strand Circle, Hyams Beach, a beachside village on Jervis Bay. The value ascribed as at 1 July 2004, the base date, is $504,000 and the applicant is contending that the value should be $300,000.

2 The Court met on site with the parties and undertook an inspection of the comparable sales as well as having the opportunity of the inspection of the subject property itself.

3 By way of description the subject property is one of a dual occupancy with the Torrens title. The attached dual occupancy was developed approximately 10 or 11 years ago and at the time the property Torrens title subdivision was permissible, however now under the Shoalhaven Local Environmental Plan subdivision of dual occupancy development is not permissible. Under the current LEP there are minimum allotment sizes and that is for attached dual occupancies 500 sq m and for detached dual occupancies 700 sq m.

4 The site can be described as on the southern slope of a relatively steep hill although it is steeper at the frontage and on the driveway but flattens out towards the rear of the subject site. The subject site is some 334 sq m, approximately 10 m wide, on average, and 33 m in depth. The adjoining site at No. 5A is of similar dimensions.

5 The Court had the opportunity of inspecting the comparable sales and the valuer that gave evidence on behalf of the Valuer General is Mr D Austin who is a qualified valuer and has been working in the Jervis Bay area for approximately the last four years. The Valuer General was represented by Ms A Pearman, counsel, and the applicant represented himself, as a litigant in person.

6 It was submitted by Ms Pearman that the Court did not have any expert evidence against that presented by the Valuer General’s expert,…