1770 Nominees Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2017] QCAT 284

CITATION: 1770 Nominees Pty Ltd v Valuer-General [2017] QCAT 284 PARTIES: 1770 Nominees Pty Ltd (Applicant) v Valuer-General (Respondent) APPLICATION NUMBER: GAR131-17 MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Acting Senior Member Paratz DELIVERED ON: 22 August 2017 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane ORDERS MADE: 1. The decision of the Registrar (Civil, Administrative and Disciplinary Division of the Tribunal) to reject the Application for Review, and for Interim Order, is confirmed. 2. The Registrar (Civil, Administrative and Disciplinary Division of the Tribunal) is directed to reject the Application for Review, and for Interim Order. CATCHWORDS: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JURISDICTION – where an application was made to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal for review of a decision, and for an interim order, in relation to proceedings before the Land Court of Queensland – where the application was rejected by the Registrar – where the applicant sought a review of the Registrar’s decision – where the Registrar’s decision was confirmed Land Valuation Act 2010 (Qld), s 155, s 178, s 179 -- 1 of 4 -- 2 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 35 APPEARANCES: This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act). REASONS FOR DECISION [1] This matter relates to the rejection of Applications made to the Tribunal. [2] 1770 Nominees Pty Ltd (‘the landowner’) filed an Application to Review a Decision, and an Application for an Interim Order, in the Tribunal on 25 May 2017. [3] The Application described the decision to be reviewed as ‘Decision on objection 31-07-29013 000420’, made on 31 July 2013 and received on ‘August 2013’. [4] The landowner described what they sought from the Tribunal in the Application to review as ‘To authorise the land court to allow the appeal.’ [5] The interim order sought was as follows: Put a stay on all payments to DNR (schedule attached). Instruct land court to re-visit our 2013 objection as it is proven on their own figures that these were not carried out correctly. i.e. value of water area has nearly halved from where it was and value of freehold land area has not changed. Place a stay on forfeiture notice. [6] The reasons given for wanting the interim order were as follows: Solicitor for Valuer General will not give us a contact number or details of a department person to have mediation. Land Court is bound by the Act and needs Order to hear appeal as we are outside our time frames. This does not fit with the Government fair-go ideals as this valuation was so high which in turn made our land rental costs that high it was impossible to make money from this area. Valuer did not give reasonable reason to dismiss objection. [7] The Registrar, Civil, Administrative and Disciplinary Division of the Tribunal advised the landowner by letter dated 5 June 2017 that he had decided to reject the Application under section 35(3)(c) of the QCAT Act on the grounds that the Application does not comply with the Act, an enabling Act or the Rules. He noted in the letter as follows: QCAT’s review jurisdiction is expressly set out in various enabling Acts. The decision outlined in the application is not one which QCAT has jurisdiction for under s175 of the Land Valuation Act 2010. Decisions concerning -- 2 of 4 -- 3 objections are exclusively the jurisdiction of the Land Court, not QCAT. Furthermore, this matter seems to be on foot at the Land Court and QCAT does not have jurisdiction to authorise the Land Court to hear matters. [8] The landowner then filed an Application for miscellaneous matters in the Tribunal on 22 June 2017. That Application requested that the principal registrar refer to the Tribunal for review the decision to reject the Application which was lodged with the Tribunal on 25 May 2017. The details were stated as: We wish to change our application. The orders we seek are for the administrative appeals tribunal to order that the decision of objection dated 31st of July 2013 be stood aside and order that the new valuation is at $10 per Square metre which is $39,320. And that this valuation is in place and continuing to this day. [9] In the miscellaneous Application the landowner states in the section ‘Briefly describe what you want to happen’ as follows: To authorise the landcourt to hear appeal LVA 101-17. [10] The decision of 31 July 2013 which the landowner refers to is contained in the bundle of documents which it filed. The decision is made by the Valuer- General, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, and says: I wish to advise that the objection against the valuation of $590,000 effective from 30 June 2013 with a date of valuation of 1 October 2012 has been decided and the valuation amount remains unaltered. [11] The decision refers to the Land Valuation Act 2010 (Qld). It notes as to an appeal that: If you do not agree with your objection decision you may appeal to the Land Court within 60 days after the issue date of this notice. If no appeal is lodged the valuation will be determined to be finalised. [12] The landowner includes in the bundle of documents a covering letter from the Land Court of Queensland which refers to attached ‘orders of the Land Court made at the directions hearing of this matter on 9 May 2017’. The notice refers to the matter as follows: File Number: LVA101-17 Case type: Appeal against land valuation, s.155 Legislation: Land Valuation Act 2010 Tenure/Property ID: 40873302 Local government: Gladstone Regional Council 1770 Nominees Pty Ltd v Valuer-General -- 3 of 4 -- 4 [13] The Tribunal derives its jurisdiction from enabling legislation. It is necessary to look to the enabling legislation to determine what the Tribunal is empowered to do. The relevant enabling legislation in these matters is the Land Valuation Act 2010 (‘the Valuation Act’). [14] The Tribunal is given jurisdiction under Chapter 5 of the Valuation Act to stay an original decision of the Valuer-General whilst it is being internally reviewed,1 and to conduct an external review of an internal review decision.2 [15] The Tribunal is not given jurisdiction to hear an appeal against an objection decision on valuation. That jurisdiction is given to the Land Court.3 [16] The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to direct the Land Court how to conduct matters before it. The Tribunal similarly has no jurisdiction, and no power, to extend the jurisdiction of the Land Court by extending time to hear matters before it. [17] The Tribunal has no power to make orders as sought in the miscellaneous Application to set aside the decision of objection, and no power to make a determination as to the valuation of land. [18] The Tribunal therefore has no jurisdiction to make orders as sought by the Applications. I confirm the decision of the Registrar, and direct the Registrar to reject the Applications. 1 Land Valuation Act 2010 (Qld), s 178. 2 Ibid, s 179. 3 Ibid, s 155. -- 4 of 4 --