RATES — categorisation of rateable land — appeal limited to questions of law under s 56A Land and Environment Court Act 1979 to a judge from a decision of a commissioner of the Court in a Class 3 rating matter — under s 529(2)(d) Local Government Act 1993 a council may determine a sub-category for business rateable land according to a centre of activity — owner of rateable land appealed to Court from decision of Council to refuse application under s 525(1)(b) to change the rating sub-category of the land from Business CBD to Business General to which far lower ad valorem rates applied — Court constituted by a commissioner dismissed appeal — under s 525(3) Council obliged to determine property was within the Business General sub-category nominated in application unless it has reasonable grounds for believing that the land is not within that category — under s 39(2) Land and Environment Court Act, on appeal from Council decision Court is under the same obligation — Council and Court (constituted by a commissioner) each decided had reasonable grounds for believing land not within Business General sub-category, but within Business CBD sub-category — meaning of "centre of activity" in s 529(2)(d) Local Government Act — whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to apply the correct test under s 525(3) because she asked the converse question — whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to adopt a polycentric decision-making process — whether Commissioner erred in law in concluding that a centre of activity for the Business CBD rating sub-category could include a fringe — whether Commissioner erred in law in taking into account the Business zoning — whether Commissioner erred in law in failing to take into account certain aspects of critical evidence.
