Tait v Valuer-General - [2015] QLC 37

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:Tait v Valuer-General [2015] QLC 37
PARTIES:Cameron Stuart Tait
(appellant)
v
Valuer-General

(respondent)

FILE NO:LVA421-12

DIVISION:General Division
PROCEEDING:  An appeal against valuation under the Land Valuation Act 2010
DELIVERED ON:                  8 September 2015
DELIVERED AT:                   Brisbane
HEARD ON:         14 October 2014
HEARD AT:Warwick
MEMBER:WL Cochrane
ORDER:1.    The appeal is dismissed and the valuation of the Valuer-General as at 1 October 2011 effective from 30 June 2012 is affirmed at $295,000 (Two Hundred and Ninety-Five Thousand Dollars).

CATCHWORDS: Land Valuation Act 2010 – statutory valuation

BT Dillon v Valuer-General (1987) 11 QLCR 231.
Nimmo v Department of Natural Resources and Mines [2005] QLC 0028.

JL and I Qualischefski & Ors v Valuer-General (1979) 6 QLCR 167.

APPEARANCES: Mr Tait self-represented.
Mr I Pepper (solicitor), for the Department of Natural Resources and Mines for the respondent.

Background

This is the decision in respect of land located at 131 Sunday Plains Road, Mount Colliery and otherwise described as Lot 137 on Crown Plan M341135, County of Merivale, Parish of Emu Vale. The subject land is about 7 km north-east of the small township of Killarney and 32 km east of the major urban area of Warwick City. It has an area 72.84 ha.
The valuation appealed against was made as at 1 October 2011, effective from 30 June 2012.
The valuation issued by the Valuer-General in the first instance was $295,000.
That valuation was objected to by Mr Tait but the objection was disallowed.
At this appeal Mr Tait contends that the land ought be valued at a figure of $170,000.
In his notice of appeal Mr Tait identifies the following grounds of appeal:
“The Department has erred in arriving at its decision on the valuation of the land by not properly taking into account the physical features of the land, accessibility to the land and insufficient note of other lands and comparable sales. Although the land has a surveyed area of 72.84 ha, only approximately 2ha of the land is usable with the balance of the land being escarpment or cliff face. The land can only be accessed by an 8 km gravel road, through undulating country and scrub. Although the land commands good views, it is not suitable for any form of high intensity tourist facility and no other land in the vicinity has been developed in that way. There are no services available to the land such [as] town water, sewerage, electricity or garbage collection.
A nearby parcel of land being Lot 143 on M341087 is the only sale in the vicinity and which sold on 9 July 2010 for $230,000. This land is larger in size being 127.5 ha but like the subject land only has a small useable area and being mostly escarpment and cliff face. This land was valued on 30 June 2011 and again on 30 June 2012 for $185,000. Some valuations of land in other nearby valleys are as follows:-
Lot 59 on M 341230 Parish of Emu…

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 Tait v Valuer-General

Details

AGLC: Tait v Valuer-General [2015] QLC 37
Case: [2015] QLC 37
Decision Date: 8 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Tait v Valuer-General, Cameron Stuart Tait appealed against the valuation of his property located at 131 Sunday Plains Road, Mount Colliery, by the Valuer-General. The subject land had an area of 72.84 ha and was zoned Rural under the Planning Scheme for the Southern Downs Regional Council. The initial valuation issued by the Valuer-General in the first instance was $295,000, effective from 30 June 2012. Mr Tait contended that the land should be valued at $170,000, as he believed that the Valuer-General had not properly taken into account the physical features of the land, accessibility, and comparable sales. The appeal was dismissed by the Land Court of Queensland, affirming the valuation of $295,000.

The Land Court considered the evidence presented by both parties, including Mr Tait's detailed statement, aerial photographs, and other relevant documentation, as well as the report of James Bomford, a registered valuer in the employ of the Valuer-General. The Court also inspected the subject property and other properties in the immediate area. The Court found that Mr Tait had failed to discharge the onus of proof on the grounds of appeal advanced by him and dismissed the appeal. The Court held that Mr Tait's approach to the valuation exercise was, in part, derailed by his focus on the views available from his property, and that the official valuation drives the rates payable, not the other way around. Therefore, the Court affirmed the valuation of the Valuer-General at $295,000.

Orders