Clow v Chief Executive, Department of Lands [1996] QLC 41
LAND COURT
BRISBANE
12 APRIL 1996
In the matter of an appeal against a valuation
Valuation Roll No.: 7692
Local Authority: BCC-Balmoral
Trinidad R and Dennis G Clow
v.
Chief Executive, Department of Lands
(Hearing at Brisbane)
D E C I S I O N ON J U R I S D I C T I O N
Facts
The appellants in this case are the owners of land situated at 22 Aster Street, Cannon
Hill, Brisbane. Pursuant to section 42(1) of the Valuation of Land Act 1944, the appellants
lodged an objection to the annual valuation of the land made by the Valuer General in 1993 and
by a determination of the Chief Executive of the Department of Lands dated 22 December 1994,
that objection was disallowed. The appellants then appealed against that determination.
However, although their notice of appeal is dated 16 January 1995, it was not received in the
registry of the Land Court until 19 April 1995.
Mr Dennis Clow gave evidence on behalf of the appellants. He explained that he had
posted the notice of appeal on 16 January 1995 but that by error he had addressed the letter to
the Department of Lands, GPO Box 1401, Brisbane. The notice of appeal should have been
addressed to the Registrar, Land Court, PO Box 367, Brisbane Roma Street. It was only when
Mr Clow contacted the Land Court registry in April 1995 and was advised that no notice of
appeal had been received in the registry that he became aware of his error and forwarded a copy
of the notice of appeal to the registry. That copy was received in the registry on 19 April 1995.
Issues
The only issue for decision by this Court is whether the Court has jurisdiction to hear the
appeal. This is an issue because the notice of appeal was received in the Land Court registry
after the time for appeal had expired.
Statutory Provisions
Sections 45 and 57 of the Valuation of Land Act 1944 enable an owner to appeal to the
Land Court against an annual valuation. The parts of the sections particularly relevant to this
appeal are:
[1996] QLC 41
-- 1 of 3 --
2
"Appeal
45(1) An owner who has objected pursuant to section 42 against a valuation made by
the chief executive may, if dissatisfied with the decision of the chief executive
upon the objection, appeal to the Land Court against the valuation.
(2) Except as hereinafter by this section provided, an appeal shall not lie unless it is
instituted within 28 days after the date of issue to the owner concerned by the
chief executive of notice of the chief executive's decision upon the objection
(which date of issue shall be stated in such notice).
(3) An appeal shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal in the Land Court registry.
...
(6) The appellant shall serve a copy of the notice of appeal on the chief executive not
later than 7 days after the notice is lodged in the Land Court registry.
...
(9) Sections 57 to 68 and section 70 apply, with any necessary changes, to an appeal
under this section.
Late Filing
57(1) Where a notice of appeal is filed in the Land Court registry but not within the
time prescribed by section 55(2), the registrar of the court shall notify the owner
that, as the notice of appeal was not filed in the Land Court registry within the
time prescribed by section 55(2), the appeal does not lie unless the owner -
(a) proves to the satisfaction of the court that the failure to institute the appeal within the
time so prescribed was caused by undue delay in the transmission of mail
in the ordinary course of post; and
(b) notifies the registrar within 21 days of the date of notification of the registrar to the
owner of the owner's intention to endeavour to so satisfy the court as
aforesaid."
Although section 57 refers to the time prescribed by section 55 as the time within which
an appeal must be filed, it is clear that because this is an appeal against an annual valuation, the
applicable time period is that prescribed by section 45 rather than that set out in section 55.
Pursuant to section 45(2) and (3), the appeal in this case should have been filed in the Land
Court registry within 28 days after the date of issue of the notice of the chief executive's
decision on the objection.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
Conclusion
The notice of appeal in this case should have been filed in the registry by 19 January
1995 which is 28 days after the date of issue of the determination under appeal. It was not filed
until 19 April 1995.
In Fischer v The Valuer General (1990) 13 QLCR 129, the Land Appeal Court held that
the procedure set forth in section 16J of the Valuation of Land Act for the institution of appeals
against an annual valuation is mandatory. (Section 16J has been renumbered as section 45. See
Reprint No 2 of the Act.) The only exception is found in section 57 which provides that when
a notice of appeal is filed outside the time prescribed, the appeal does not lie unless the owner
proves to the satisfaction of the court that the late filing was caused by undue delay in the
transmission of mail in the ordinary course of post. There is no suggestion in this case that the
late filing was caused by a delay in the transmission of mail in the ordinary course of post.
Therefore, although the court has sympathy with Mr Clow's plight, the law is clear. The court
does not have jurisdiction in this matter.
Order
The appeal is struck out for want of jurisdiction.
CAC MacDONALD
MEMBER OF THE LAND COURT
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QLC/1996/041