Thomas J & Betty a Andison v. Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources

Thomas J and Betty A Andison appealed the unimproved valuation of their property at 8 Horseshoe Bay Road, Bowen, which was valued at $115,000 by the Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources. The appellants argued that the correct unimproved value should be $80,000. The case was heard by the Land Court, Brisbane, on 28 June 2000. The court examined the nature of the land, the availability of sea views, privacy, and the comparison of sales.

The key issues were whether the valuation of the Chief Executive was correct, and whether the appellants had demonstrated a serious error or a wrong principle in the valuation process. The court considered the evidence provided by both parties, including the nature of the land and comparison of sales. The evidence showed that the subject land had an area of 1289 square metres, was zoned as "Residential" under the Bowen Shire Council Town Plan, and had direct access to the beach via Queens Beach Esplanade. The court also considered the availability of sea views, the level of privacy, and the comparison of sales of other lands in the area.

After examining the evidence and inspecting the subject land, the court concluded that the unimproved value of the land should be determined based on the balance between the better views from one sale and the greater privacy of the subject land. The court found that the key comparison was between the subject land and the common Sale 6 (24 Horseshoe Bay Road). The court accepted that the better views of Sale 6 were balanced by the greater privacy of the subject land. The court also considered the additional premium for the larger size of the subject land compared to Sale 6 and adopted the premium applied by the Departmental Registered Valuer.

The court concluded that the appellants had not proved their case and that the onus to prove their case rested with them. The court held that unless it was demonstrated that the Chief Executive had used a wrong principle or made a serious error, the unimproved value as determined by the Chief Executive is deemed to be correct. The appeal was dismissed, and the unimproved value of the subject land as determined by the Chief Executive at $115,000 was affirmed.