Brand & Anor v The Valuer-General [1990] QLC 196

Re: Determination of unimproved value - Shire of Widgee V89-425 GJ. and LA Brand v. The Valuer-General DECISION IANDCOURT, BRISBANE. 28th March, 1990. This is an appeal against the determination of by the Valuer-General of an unimproved value of $14,700 for Lot 16 on RP 175676 parish of Woonga containing an area of 2,000 square metres. This land is situated at 11 Australia Drive, Southside on the outskirts of the City of Gympie. It is zoned ''Low Density Residential" within the Shire of Widgee Town Planning Scheme and is developed with a single unit dwelling house. The relevant date for the determination of the unimproved value is 31st March, 1988. The appellants contend for an unimproved value of $10,800. This is the unimproved value determined by the Valuer-General for the subject parcel as at an earlier relevant date of 31st March, 1983. Glen James Brand informed the Court that the Widgee Shire Council elected to adopt an adjusted valuation (sometimes called the phasing-in of a valuation) under the provisions of the Valuation of Land (Annual Adjustment) Act of 1984. As a result, the Valuer-General incorporated within his notice of valuation issued on 27th August, 1984 a series of rateable values which were to be applied over the five year period of adjustment (vide Section 6 of the 1984 Act). The notice indicates that the [1990] QLC 196 -- 1 of 3 -- - Page 2 - rateable value for the years ending 30th June, 1988 and 30th June, 1989 was to be $10,800. Now it is basically because of this advice that Mr Brand comes before the Court and submits that the value of $10,800 should be adopted for rating purposes as at the relevant date of 31st March, 1988. Mr Brand can see no reason for the valuation of his land to have been increased over $10,800, particularly as there have been no improvements made in the area. The street has no kerbing or channelling or lighting, and no sewerage services are available. The valuation under appeal was made by Registered Valuer, Darryl Ross Gaedtke, who was called in evidence by the respondent. Mr Gaedtke describes the subject land as having a gentle to medium fall below the road level. It is high in elevation with an outlook over the adjoining rural lands. Mr Gaedtke made the valuation in relation to two sales of sites in the area and scheduled the comparisons, as he sees them, between the subject land and the sales lots. Prima facie, this sales evidence supports a value of $14,700 for the subject land. Now it is clear that Mr Brand has been motivated in this matter by what he calls the large increase between the $10,800 rateable value and the $14,700 valuation, but it is also apparent that he thought the valuation of $10,800 was made as at, or near, the relevant date of 31st March, 1988. This is plainly not so, since the notice of valuation attached to the appeal notice clearly states that the valuation of $10,800 was the "rateable" value as at 30th June, 1988 and 30th June, 1989. It is equally apparent that the valuation of $10,800 was struck as at the 31st March, 1983 and it was solely that the Shire of Widgee chose to phase-in the then valuation increase from $3,700 over a five year period which resulted in the advice from the Valuer-General that the rateable value was to be $10,800 after the phase-in. This being the case, I cannot hold that the 1983 relevant date value should prevail, especially as the 1988 relevant date valuation is supported by 1987 date sales evidence. Further this sales evidence takes account of -- 2 of 3 -- - Page 3 - the lack of facilities raised by Mr Brand since it is located in close proximity to the subject land. It follows then that the appeal should be dismissed, and that the unimproved value of $14,700 for Lot 16 on RP 175676, parish of Woonga be affirmed. (Signed) C.H. Carter. Member of the T.and Court. -- 3 of 3 --