Challenger Property Asset Management Pty Ltd & Anor v Stonnington City Council & Anor

(2011) 34 VR 445; [2011] VSC 184

Supreme Court of Victoria

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Land Law
2. › Valuation of land
3. › Capital improved value
4. › Meaning of 'unencumbered estate in fee simple'
5. › Whether lease is an encumbrance
6. › Whether 'vacant to let' allowance required
7. › Valuation of Land Act 1960 (Vic), s 5A
1. Land Law
2. › Valuation of land
3. › Estate in fee simple
4. › Meaning of 'fee simple in possession'
5. › Whether physical occupation required
6. › Freeholder who has leased land is seised and possessed of freehold
1. Land Law
2. › Valuation of land
3. › Commercial property
4. › Assessment of development potential
5. › Comparable sales analysis
6. › Capitalisation of rental income
7. › Valuation of Land Act 1960 (Vic), s 5A
1. Real Property
2. › Estates in land
3. › Fee simple
4. › Nature of estate in fee simple as highest estate known to law
5. › Distinction between ownership and possession
6. › Receipt of rents and profits as evidence of possession

Quick Take

In determining the 'capital improved value' of leased commercial property under the Valuation of Land Act 1960 (Vic), the property is not to be valued on a 'vacant to let' basis requiring letting-up allowances. Rather, the property is to be valued as occupied at market rents, with leases disregarded only where they are burdensome or depreciatory of the fee simple estate. The approach in Shell Co of Australia Ltd v City of Melbourne [1997] 2 VR 615 should not be followed.