Fitzgerald v Valuer General (No 3) [2011] NSWLEC 1198

Fitzgerald v Valuer General (No 3) [2011] NSWLEC 1198

The Court rejected valuation material that could not be used in the s 6A statutory valuation exercise, accepted the uncontested expert evidence that land improvements should be valued at $20,000, and used comparable sales, principally the Beray Close sale, with adjusted allowances for area, topography, views and market movement. This produced a value of about $517,500, which was rounded to $520,000 and substituted under s 40(1) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Statutory Valuation Appeal / Extempore Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The appeal is upheld and a statutory valuation of $520,000 is substituted as at the base date of 1 July 2009.
Legal Topics
['statutory Valuation' 'comparable Sales' 'adjustments to Comparable Sales' 'non Use of Other Statutory Valuations for Comparative Purposes']
['land Valuation' 'administrative Law'] ['statutory Valuation' 'comparable Sales' 'adjustments to Comparable Sales' 'non Use of Other Statutory Valuations for Comparative Purposes']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 3 Statutory Valuation Appeal / Extempore Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What statutory valuation should be substituted for the applicant's Lisarow property as at the base date of 1 July 2009." 'Whether materials including other statutory valuations and lending valuation material could be used in the valuation exercise.' 'What adjustments should be made to comparable sales and what value should be attributed to land improvements.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court rejected valuation material that could not be used in the s 6A statutory valuation exercise, accepted the uncontested expert evidence that land improvements should be valued at $20,000, and used comparable sales, principally the Beray Close sale, with adjusted allowances for area, topography, views and market movement. This produced a value of about $517,500, which was rounded to $520,000 and substituted under s 40(1) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916.

Court Disposition

The appeal is upheld and a statutory valuation of $520,000 is substituted as at the base date of 1 July 2009.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld;' 'Pursuant to s 40(1) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916, in lieu of the statutory valuation as at the base date of 1 July 2009, a value of $520,000 is substituted; and' 'The exhibits, other than Exhibits B and 2, are returned.']