Anastasios Prilis v Valuer-General [2022] NSWLEC 11
The Court preferred Mr Hill's evidence. The highest and best use of the Site was its current use as ground floor retail and first floor commercial, not mixed retail and residential development. Mr Perkins's 25.5% heritage adjustment could not be sustained because it depended on a rejected highest and best use and lacked market evidence for the asserted value impacts. The appropriate valuation approach was the direct comparison method using net lettable area as the measurement index, an additional 5% heritage adjustment for inability to alter internal layout, Mr Hill's analysed land values and comparable sales adjustments, and a 5% per annum market movement. On that basis, the Applicants'...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 18 February 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Class 3 Appeal Against Land Valuations Under the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (nsw) / Appeal Against the Valuer General's Disallowance of Objections to Land Values for Base Dates 1 July 2017, 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019
- Outcome
- The Applicants' claims were not successful. The appeals for the 2017 and 2018 valuation years were upheld with reduced valuations, and the appeal for the 2019 valuation year was dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['valuation of Land' 'heritage Restricted Land' 'highest and Best Use' 'comparable Sales' 'direct Comparison Method' 'market Movement' 'valuation of Land Act 1916 (nsw) Ss 6 a and 14 G']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Appeal Against Land Valuations Under the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (nsw) / Appeal Against the Valuer General's Disallowance of Objections to Land Values for Base Dates 1 July 2017, 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the land values determined by the Valuer-General for Lot 1 in DP 798784 at 325 King Street, Newtown as at 1 July 2017, 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019 were too high.' 'What valuation methodology should be applied to heritage restricted land under ss 6A(1) and 14G of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW).' 'What was the highest and best use of the Site for the relevant valuation years.' 'Which comparable sales and adjustments should be adopted, including adjustments for heritage restrictions, net lettable area, location, access, frontage, size, shape and market movement.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court preferred Mr Hill's evidence. The highest and best use of the Site was its current use as ground floor retail and first floor commercial, not mixed retail and residential development. Mr Perkins's 25.5% heritage adjustment could not be sustained because it depended on a rejected highest and best use and lacked market evidence for the asserted value impacts. The appropriate valuation approach was the direct comparison method using net lettable area as the measurement index, an additional 5% heritage adjustment for inability to alter internal layout, Mr Hill's analysed land values and comparable sales adjustments, and a 5% per annum market movement. On that basis, the Applicants'...
Court Disposition
The Applicants' claims were not successful. The appeals for the 2017 and 2018 valuation years were upheld with reduced valuations, and the appeal for the 2019 valuation year was dismissed.
Orders
- ['In proceedings 354865 of 2020, the Appeal is upheld.' 'In proceedings 354865 of 2020, the valuation of the land being Lot 1 in Deposited Plan 798784, known as 325 King Street, Newtown as at 1 July 2017 is set in the amount of $2,970,000.' 'In proceedings 354865 of 2020, the exhibits are returned.' 'In proceedings...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment