Riveredge Investments Pty Limited v Valuer General of New South Wales [2026] NSWLEC45

The process of objecting to a land valuation by the Valuer General for rating and land tax purposes in NSW has changed significantly following the intervention of the Land & Environment Court. 

A process had developed whereby the Valuer General would issue a land valuation (Valuation A – s29(1), Valuation of Land Act 1916) and the landholder could object to Valuation A (s29 (3A)). The Valuer General would then consider the objection (s35B(2)) and usually get another valuation, Valuation B (the defensive valuation), in order to decide whether to allow or dismiss the objection (s35B(1)).

If the Valuer General dismisses the objection, the landholder may appeal to the Land & Environment Court (s37(1)) and seek the leave of the Court to call evidence from an expert valuer. In response, the Valuer General may call evidence from a further independent valuer, Valuation C (the positive valuation), for use in the Court proceedings.

Accordingly, the Valuer General effectively has three attempts to value the land and so may have three different valuation numbers including Valuation B (the defensive valuation) and Valuation C (the positive valuation) for use in Court - being a challenging and potentially unfair situation for the landholder who has the onus of proof in Court proceedings.

However, the Chief Judge of the Land & Environment Court has now intervened to require the Valuer General to seek leave from the Court if it wishes to call such evidence (Valuation C – the positive valuation) in Court proceedings (Riveredge Investments Pty Limited v Valuer General of New South Wales [2026] NSWLEC45).

In seeking leave to call Valuation C, the Court now requires that the Valuer General demonstrate two matters:

- why Valuation C (the positive valuation) should be allowed instead of the Valuer General relying on Valuation B (the defensive valuation); and

- why it is reasonable to put the landholder to the time, effort and cost of not only proving its case against the Valuer General’s determination to disallow the objection to Valuation B (the defensive valuation) but also defending the new case advanced by the Valuer General for Valuation C (the positive valuation).

The decision by the Chief Judge is very helpful for landholders in Court proceedings as, if leave is not granted, landholders will now only have to focus on Valuation B (the defensive valuation), saving time as well as legal and expert witness costs. 

While it would be preferable for the Valuer General to be correct the first time (Valuation A), if Valuation B is lower this at least allows the landholder to make a commercial decision whether to accept Valuation B or proceed to an appeal in Court.

Given the importance of the Valuer General’s land valuations for the amount of rates and land tax payable in NSW, clients are encouraged to contact Sovereign Valuations for valuation advice when considering lodging an objection to the Valuer General’s valuation or commencing Court proceedings to appeal the Valuer General’s dismissal of an objection.