Champneys v Minister for Lands [1995] QLC 150

LAND COURT BRISBANE 10 November 1995 Re: Determination of Rent - First Decennial Rental Period Grazing Homestead Perpetual Lease No 36/7919, Roma District. Lessee: Janice Dorothy Champneys. (Hearing at Roma) D E C I S I O N In this case the Crown is seeking an annual rent of $1,026 for the first decennial rental period for the abovementioned Grazing Homestead Perpetual Lease, which commenced on 1 January 1990. The rent for the previous rental period was $860 per annum. The increase in rent arises from the implementation by the Crown of recommendations by Mr CH Carter, Member of the Land Court, following an Inquiry which he held in 1989. The recommendation relevant for this purpose was for the rental standard for the hypothetical best sheep property in the Roma District to increase from 28 cents per sheep per annum to 45 cents per sheep per annum. Mr Carter also recommended that the determination of rent of arable land on Grazing Homestead Perpetual Leases be at the rate of 2.5% of the unimproved value of such arable land. The increased rental standards were challenged in the Land Court and Land Appeal Court. In Determinations of Rent - Pastoral Holding Stawellton No 23/2004, Hughenden District, and Other Grazing Selections, decision delivered 20 March 1992 (not reported), the Land Appeal Court reduced the sheep rental standards by 20% and the arable component to the equivalent of 2% of the unimproved value of arable land. Grazing Homestead Perpetual Lease No 36/7919, Roma District, is in respect of the land described as Lot 25 on Plan WV844, Parish of Spowers, containing an area of 811.598 hectares. It is situated approximately 42 kilometres south-west of Roma on a bitumen sealed road. According to the Crown report prepared by Mr MD Redgen, a registered valuer employed by the Department of Lands, in its natural state the land comprised 485 hectares of open downs and 326.598 hectares of box and coolibah flats, slopes and ridges. An area of 324 hectares was under cultivation but, according to Mr Redgen, only about 210 hectares (26%) was considered suitable for agriculture with normal conservation measures. Soils include grey, brown and black clay loams, varying to heavy self-mulching cracking downs soils. There are areas of stone and claypan. The slopes are predominantly about 2% but vary up to 4%. [1995] QLC 150 -- 1 of 3 -- 2 Mr Redgen's report states that the property is watered by one near-permanent natural waterhole in Muckadilla Creek and two unequipped earth dams. The highest and best use of the land is for sheep grazing and grain growing. He estimates the carrying capacity of the area not considered suitable for agriculture at 1 sheep to 0.8 hectares, or 752 head. Mrs JD Champneys appeared and gave evidence. Mrs Champneys did not disagree with the description given by Mr Redgen, but thought that the distance from Roma was more like 48 kilometres. She also said that the ideal carrying capacity was 400 ewes and 400 lambs, or approximately 600 adult sheep equivalents. However, it appears that Mrs Champneys is excluding the total area of cultivation. When this is adjusted to the 210 hectares which Mr Redgen has classed as arable country and the balance area is considered to be suitable for carrying sheep, the two carrying capacities are not far apart. Mr Redgen explained how he arrived at the recommended rent by the method approved by the Land Appeal Court. He had adjusted the standard rent from the 45 cents recommended by Mr Carter by 20% as found by the Land Appeal Court, allowing for a factor of 1.5% for distance from Roma. No other factors were applicable in respect of this property. This brought the adjusted rate per sheep to 35.48 cents. When multiplied by the carrying capacity of 752 sheep, a rent for the grazing country of $267 per annum was arrived at. In order to arrive at the rent for the arable country, Mr Redgen referred to the property known as "Araluen", situated in the vicinity of the subject land, which was used as a test case before the Land Appeal Court. In respect of that property, the Land Appeal Court determined the unimproved value of the arable component at $170 per hectare. Comparing the two arable areas, Mr Redgen was of the opinion that the arable area on the subject land should be $180 per hectare, because of its better access and less stone. Applying $180 to the 210 hectares of arable component on the subject land resulted in an unimproved value of $37,800, 2% of which is $756. Adding the grazing rent of $267 per annum to the arable rent of $756 per annum resulted in a rent of $1,023 per annum. Mr Redgen explained that the adopted rent of $1,026 per annum arose because the Department adjusted the total rent by deducting 20% as an administrative measure rather than going through the process outlined above. However, he conceded that the calculations as outlined provides a more accurate rent. Mrs Champneys had no real argument with the method approved by the Land Appeal Court as applied by Mr Redgen, apart from her argument about distance. However, Mrs Champneys may well have been referring to the distance to the house rather than the distance to the boundary and in the circumstances I accept Mr Redgen's estimate of distance. -- 2 of 3 -- 3 After considering the evidence in this case, I have come to the conclusion that the method approved by the Land Appeal Court has been correctly applied. Therefore, I intend to adopt the rent calculated by Mr Redgen, rounded off to $1,020 per annum. Accordingly, the rent for the first decennial rental period for the lease of Grazing Homestead Perpetual Lease No 36/7919, Roma District, is determined at One thousand and twenty dollars ($1,020) per annum. Member of the Land Court -- 3 of 3 --