Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Glenmarie Capital Pty Limited v Valuer General of New South Wales [2020] NSWLEC 1291 Hearing dates: Conciliation conference on 12 May 2020, 17 and 24 June 2020 Date of orders: 09 July 2020 Decision date: 09 July 2020 Jurisdiction: Class 3 Before: Peatman AC Decision: Proceedings 2020/44249 Refer to [10] Proceedings 2020/44248 Refer to [11] Proceedings 2020/44250 Refer to [12] Catchwords: VALUATION OF LAND – state heritage listed property – method of valuation – valuation subject to heritage restrictions – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders Legislation Cited: Heritage Act 1977 Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Valuation of Land Act 1916 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Glenmarie Capital Pty Limited (Applicant) Valuer General of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: A Hemmings (Applicant) A Pearman (Respondent) Solicitor: Beatty Legal (Applicant) Crown Solicitor's Office (NSW) (Respondent) File Number(s): 2020/44248; 2020/44249 and 2020/44250 Publication restriction: No Judgment 1. COMMISSIONER: The Applicant owns Lot 103 DP1191992 known as 787 Hunter Street, Newcastle NSW 2302 (Land). At all material times, the entirety of the Land was subject to the listing of the former Castlemaine Brewery on the State Heritage Register (Listing Number 00312) (SHR Listing). 2. The proceedings concern the Valuer General's valuations of the Land in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 and for the heritage valuation of the entirety of the Land in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977 as at base dates 1 July 2016, 1 July 2017, and 1 July 2018. 3. The Applicant appealed to the Court pursuant to s 19(b) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (LEC Act) from the Valuer General's valuation of the Land as at the base dates for 2016, 2017 and 2018 for rating and taxing purposes. 4. The proceedings fall within Class 3 of the Court's jurisdiction pursuant to s 19 of the LEC Act. 5. The Court arranged a conciliation conference under s 34(1) of the LEC Act between the parties, which was held on 12 May 2020, 17 and 24 June 2020. I presided over the conciliation conference. 6. At the conciliation conference, the parties reached agreement as to the terms of a decision in the proceedings that would be acceptable to the parties. This decision involved the Court upholding the appeal in each proceeding and the parties agreeing to the Land values and the heritage values of the Land at each base date. The agreed Land values and heritage values have been determined in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 and the Heritage Act 1977 for the following reasons: 1. The agreed Land values satisfy the requirements of ss 6A(1) and 14G (2) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916. 2. The agreed heritage values have been determined on the basis that, as at each base date: 1. the entirety of the Land was subject to the SHR Listing and was heritage restricted pursuant to, and for the purposes of, s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977; and 2. an appropriate allowance has been made to the Land values as a consequence of making the assumptions set out in the definition of "heritage valuation" in s 123 of the Heritage Act 1977. 1. Under s 34(3) of the LEC Act, I must dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision if the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions. The parties' decision involves the Court exercising the function under s 40 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 to make a decision in place of the decision to which the appeal relates, that is the Land value as at the base dates for 2016, 2017 and 2018 for rating and taxing purposes. The parties agreed that the Land value is as follows: Proceedings 2020/44249 1. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2016 is determined as: 1. $4,200,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $1,820,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. Proceedings 2020/44248 1. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2017 is determined as: 1. $6,950,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $2,040,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. Proceedings 2020/44250 1. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2018 is determined as: 1. $7,980,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $2,290,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. 1. I am satisfied that the parties' decision is one that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, as required by s 34(3) of the LEC Act. The Applicant exercised its right to appeal to the Court pursuant to s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916, and lodged its appeals within the time limit provided in s 38 of that Act. The Court has exercised the power to make a decision in place of the decision to which the appeals relate under s 40 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916. 2. As the parties' decision is a decision that the Court could have made in the proper exercise of its functions, I am required under s 34(3) of the LEC Act to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties' decision. Proceedings 2020/44249 1. The Court orders: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2016 is determined as: 1. $4,200,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $1,820,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. 1. Each party is to bear their own costs in these proceedings. Proceedings 2020/44248 1. The Court orders: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2017 is determined as: 1. $6,950,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $2,040,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. 1. Each party is to bear their own costs in these proceedings. Proceedings 2020/44250 1. The Court orders: 1. The appeal is upheld. 2. The value of the land at base date 1 July 2018 is determined as: 1. $7,980,000 in accordance with s 6A of the Valuation of Land Act 1916; and 2. $2,290,000 in accordance with s 125 of the Heritage Act 1977. 1. Each party is to bear their own costs in these proceedings. …………………… M Peatman Acting Commissioner of the Court ********* DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 09 July 2020