TONKIN and VALUER GENERAL

The case involved a dispute between the Valuer General and a property owner, Tonkin, regarding the valuation of a small rural farm holding. The disagreement centred on the unimproved value of the land and the methodology, assumptions, and data used by the Valuer General in determining this value. The matter was heard by the Valuer General Review Tribunal, which was responsible for assessing whether the tribunal's valuation was correct in law or made a mistake on a question of fact. The issues that the tribunal needed to resolve included whether the Valuer General's valuation process adhered to the relevant legal standards and practices, and whether there was sufficient evidence to support the valuation, particularly in light of the applicant's concerns about the consistency of land values over time and the alleged discrimination in the provision of government services.

The tribunal examined the evidence provided by both parties and found that the Valuer General's assessment was based on a rigorous application of the principles of land valuation. The tribunal was satisfied that the Valuer General had followed the law and established practices in land valuation, and had accepted the expert evidence provided by the valuers engaged by the Valuer General. The tribunal also noted that the applicant had not provided any expert evidence in rebuttal and had raised extraneous matters, such as the levels of government expenditure on services, which were not relevant to the issue of land valuation. The tribunal concluded that the Valuer General's valuation was consistent with the 'valuer's art' and the coordination of land values, and that the applicant's arguments about the anomalous or unjustified increase in land values were not supported by the evidence. The tribunal also addressed the question of costs, noting that the applicant had raised the issue but did not provide any grounds for the tribunal to consider an order for costs.

In summary, the tribunal dismissed the application and found in favour of the Valuer General, affirming the correctness of the land valuation. The tribunal's decision was based on a thorough examination of the evidence and the application of established principles of land valuation. The tribunal found that the Valuer General had followed the law and practice in determining the unimproved value of the land and that the applicant's arguments were not supported by the evidence. The tribunal did not make any order for costs, as the applicant had not provided any grounds for the tribunal to consider such an order.