Valuer-General v Fenton Nominees Pty Ltd [1982] HCA 46

Valuer-General v Fenton Nominees Pty Ltd [1982] HCA 46

The unimproved value had to be assessed by reference to what a hypothetical purchaser would pay for the subject land as vacant land suitable for commercial redevelopment. Comparable improved properties had been acquired by developers not for their existing improvements but to demolish them and create vacant consolidated development sites; therefore the purchase prices plus demolition and earthworks costs were probative of what developers were prepared to pay for comparable unimproved land. The vendors' perspective, including any value to them of improvements or reluctance to sell, did not deprive the sales of their relevance. Wells J. was correct to accept the appellant's valuation...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Valuation Appeal Concerning Unimproved Value of Land / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs; Full Court order set aside; appeal to that Court dismissed with costs; orders made by Wells J. restored.
Legal Topics
['unimproved Value' 'comparable Sales' 'expert Valuation Evidence' 'appellate Review in Valuation Appeals' 'highest and Best Use']
['land Valuation' 'property Law'] ['unimproved Value' 'comparable Sales' 'expert Valuation Evidence' 'appellate Review in Valuation Appeals' 'highest and Best Use']

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

Valuation Appeal Concerning Unimproved Value of Land / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia was correct in preferring the respondent's expert evidence to the appellant's expert evidence accepted by Wells J." 'How prices paid for improved land acquired for redevelopment should be used to assess unimproved land value.' 'Whether comparable sales of sites assembled from separate improved parcels were affected by special circumstances or special value to vendors so as to make them unreliable.' "Whether, if the appellant's valuation approach was accepted, the value should nevertheless be reduced to $45 per square metre."]

Ratio Decidendi

The unimproved value had to be assessed by reference to what a hypothetical purchaser would pay for the subject land as vacant land suitable for commercial redevelopment. Comparable improved properties had been acquired by developers not for their existing improvements but to demolish them and create vacant consolidated development sites; therefore the purchase prices plus demolition and earthworks costs were probative of what developers were prepared to pay for comparable unimproved land. The vendors' perspective, including any value to them of improvements or reluctance to sell, did not deprive the sales of their relevance. Wells J. was correct to accept the appellant's valuation...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; Full Court order set aside; appeal to that Court dismissed with costs; orders made by Wells J. restored.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed with costs.' 'Order of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia set aside.' 'In lieu thereof order that appeal to that Court be dismissed with costs.' 'Restore orders made by Wells J.']