Background
Richard John Wills and Beth Gertrude Wills appealed the Valuer-General’s land valuation of their property at 13 Tipper Avenue, Bronte, being Lot 24 in DP 535639. The valuation, issued with their 29 January 2026 land tax assessment, fixed the land value at $5,730,000 for the valuing year commencing 1 July 2025.
The applicants objected within the statutory period. After the Valuer-General rejected the objection on 9 March 2026, they appealed to the Land and Environment Court under s 37 of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW). At a Court-arranged conciliation conference, the parties agreed on the outcome and supplied a signed s 34 agreement and jurisdictional statement.
The Court’s Holding
Commissioner Targett upheld the appeal and determined the land value at $5,200,000 for the 1 July 2025 valuing year, exercising the Court’s power under ss 6A and 40(1)(b) of the Valuation of Land Act 1916 (NSW).
The Court held that the agreed outcome was one it could make in the proper exercise of its functions. Section 34(3) of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW) therefore required the Court to dispose of the proceedings in accordance with the parties’ agreement. The Commissioner made clear that no merits assessment of the originally disputed valuation issues was required or undertaken. Each party bore its own costs.
Key Takeaways
- The land value was reduced from $5,730,000 to $5,200,000 for the relevant valuing year.
- A valuation appeal may be resolved through a s 34 conciliation agreement where the agreed decision is within the Court’s power.
- Consent orders following conciliation do not necessarily reflect a judicial merits determination of the valuation dispute.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the Land and Environment Court’s statutory role in giving effect to a valid conciliated resolution of a land-value appeal. It also distinguishes a consent-based valuation outcome from a precedent-setting merits ruling on valuation methodology or comparable sales evidence.