Wu v Valuer General (No 2) [2013] NSWLEC 1160

Wu v Valuer General (No 2) [2013] NSWLEC 1160

The Court found that the appropriate statutory valuations for Lot 2506 in DP 752038 should be determined by the comparable sales method within the Belrose area, with an additional $150,000 deduction for odour affectation from the adjacent waste facility, which exceeded the $50,000 deduction made by the Valuer General's expert. The highest and best use of the land is as a residential property, supported by continuous development consents, not as vacant holding land. Mr Wu's evidence regarding dust did not justify further adjustment. The appeals are upheld and new lower valuations set for the years in dispute.

Parties
Applicant: Mr Pei Long Wu; Respondent: Valuer General
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Statutory Valuation Appeal / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Appeals upheld. Statutory valuations adjusted and determined for each year. Exhibits returned.
Legal Topics
Statutory Valuation, Land Value Assessment, Comparable Sales, Adjustment for Land Affectation (odour)
Valuation Law Property Law Statutory Valuation Land Value Assessment Comparable Sales Adjustment for Land Affectation (odour)

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Pei Long Wu

Applicant

Valuer General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Statutory Valuation Appeal / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate statutory land value for Lot 2506 in DP 752038 for the years in question?
  2. 2 What constitutes the highest and best use of the land?
  3. 3 What is the appropriate adjustment for odour affectation from the Belrose Waste and Recycling Centre?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the appropriate statutory valuations for Lot 2506 in DP 752038 should be determined by the comparable sales method within the Belrose area, with an additional $150,000 deduction for odour affectation from the adjacent waste facility, which exceeded the $50,000 deduction made by the Valuer General's expert. The highest and best use of the land is as a residential property, supported by continuous development consents, not as vacant holding land. Mr Wu's evidence regarding dust did not justify further adjustment. The appeals are upheld and new lower valuations set for the years in dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeals upheld. Statutory valuations adjusted and determined for each year. Exhibits returned.

Orders

  • In matter 30177/2013: Appeal upheld; value as at 1 July 2005 is $1,375,000.
  • In matter 30212/2012: Appeal upheld; value as at 1 July 2006 is $1,660,000.