Spear v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources

Marjorie J Spear appealed against the valuation of her land, as determined by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources. The Chief Executive had determined the unimproved value of Mrs Spear's land at $160,000 as at 1 January 1995 under the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1944. Mrs Spear submitted that the valuation was incorrect, and estimated the unimproved value to be $89,000. The grounds of appeal were that the Chief Executive had made a 94% increase in the unimproved value by relying on two recent sales with frontage to the Barron River, which had circumstances unrelated to the subject land; the subject land was affected by overhead powerlines for which sufficient allowance had not been made; noise from traffic on the Barron River Bridge affected the unimproved value; lack of amenities and services had not been sufficiently considered; the valuation was out of relativity with the valuation of neighbouring land; and the valuation did not take into account the topography and nature of the land.

The court found that the method of valuation used by the Chief Executive, direct comparison with sales, was appropriate in this case. The Chief Executive had relied on sales of comparable esplanade riverfront lands in the area, and had given careful consideration to the differences with the subject land. The court found that Mrs Spear had not been able to prove to its satisfaction her grounds of appeal, and that the Chief Executive had not acted upon a wrong principle, or made a serious error of fact. The court could not find that the valuation was made by a method fundamentally erroneous, and therefore Mrs Spear had not been able to rebut the statutory presumption of correctness imposed by s.33 of the Act.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the unimproved value of the subject land as determined by the Chief Executive in the sum of One Hundred and Sixty Thousand Dollars ($160,000) was affirmed.