Forest Rise Living Pty Ltd v Valuer General [2008] NSWLEC 1117

Forest Rise Living Pty Ltd v Valuer General [2008] NSWLEC 1117

The applicant did not prove that the assessed land value was excessive. The Court accepted that Mr Bryer's comparable sales analysis provided an explicable valuation approach, while the applicant did not explicitly address the relevant issues through comparable sales analysis and did not support the proposed residual development approach with written scenarios or appropriate expert evidence. The appeal was therefore dismissed and the Valuer General's land value of $1,100,000 as at 1 July 2006 was confirmed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 Against Land Value Assessed by the Valuer General / Further Hearing Under Section 34(3)(b)(ii) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 After Unsuccessful Mediation
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; assessed land value confirmed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['land Value' 'comparable Sales Evidence' 'residential Subdivision Potential' 'onus of Proof on Valuation Appeal']
['valuation of Land' 'land and Environment Court Proceedings'] ['land Value' 'comparable Sales Evidence' 'residential Subdivision Potential' 'onus of Proof on Valuation Appeal']

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

Appeal Under Section 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 Against Land Value Assessed by the Valuer General / Further Hearing Under Section 34(3)(b)(ii) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 After Unsuccessful Mediation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant proved that the Valuer General's assessed land value of the subject property as at 1 July 2006 was excessive." 'The effect on land value of water flow burdening the land and the possible requirement for a detention tank in the event of subdivision.' 'The effect on land value of the possible requirement to create a fire reserve in the event of subdivision.' 'The effect of those matters on the potential number of residential blocks that may be created in the event of subdivision.' 'The effect of deteriorated property market conditions in the period leading to the base date.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not prove that the assessed land value was excessive. The Court accepted that Mr Bryer's comparable sales analysis provided an explicable valuation approach, while the applicant did not explicitly address the relevant issues through comparable sales analysis and did not support the proposed residual development approach with written scenarios or appropriate expert evidence. The appeal was therefore dismissed and the Valuer General's land value of $1,100,000 as at 1 July 2006 was confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; assessed land value confirmed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The land value of $1,100,000 as at the base date of 1st July 2006 for the property at 238 Wells Street, Spingfield is confirmed.' 'No order is made as to costs.' 'The exhibits are returned.']