LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	Copley & Anor v Valuer-General [2020] QLC 7	
		
PARTIES:	Denise Copley
(appellant)

Gregory Copley
(appellant)	
		
	v	
		
	Valuer-General
(respondent)	
		
FILE NO:	LVA675-19	
		
DIVISION:	General Division	
		
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against objection decision on a valuation under the Land Valuation Act 2010	
		
DELIVERED ON:	Orders delivered 5 November 2019
Reasons delivered 6 February 2020	
		
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane	
		
HEARD ON:	On the papers	
		
HEARD AT:	Heard on the papers	
		
JUDICIAL REGISTRAR:	
GJ Smith 	
		
ORDER:	The Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal.	
		
CATCHWORDS:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COMMENCING PROCEEDINGS – TIME FOR SERVICE OF ORIGINATING PROCESS OR RENEWAL – where the appellant failed to appeal to the Land Court in time –where the Notice of Appeal was lost or delayed in the post– whether there was a reasonable excuse for the failure to lodge the appeal in time – where the Court found there was a reasonable excuse, and that it therefore had jurisdiction to hear the appeal 

Land Valuation Act 2010, s 155, s 157, s 158

ISPT Pty Ltd v Valuer General [2012] QLC 48, cited	
		
APPEARANCES:	Not applicable	
		
[1]	In this matter, the Court must determine if it has jurisdiction pursuant to s 157 of the Land Valuation Act 2010 (the LVA) to hear and determine an appeal against an annual valuation as at 1 October 2018 of land located at North Maclean within the Logan City Council local government area.  
[2]	The respondent issued an objection decision notice in respect of the subject property 3 July 2019. A Notice of Appeal in respect of this decision was filed in the Land Court registry on Tuesday 3 September 2019, 1 day after the expiry of the appeal period.  Accordingly, the Court will only have jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal if a “reasonable excuse”— as required by s 158 of the LVA — is established.
[3]	On 10 September 2019, a Deputy Registrar wrote to the applicants to advise that the Court could not hear the proposed appeal unless a reasonable excuse was established for not filing the Notice of Appeal within the appeal period.
[4]	By email correspondence dated 3 October 2019, Mr Gregory Copley provided tracking information from Australia Post which indicates that the Notice of Appeal would ordinarily have been received in the Land Court registry on Monday 2 September 2019. 
[5]	On 25 October 2019, the registry received email correspondence from In- House Legal, Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy indicating that the Department did not oppose the Court finding that jurisdiction was established. Notwithstanding this advice, the existence of a reasonable excuse must still be established on the balance of probabilities in respect of the failure to lodge the Notice of Appeal within the prescribed period.
[6]	On 5 November 2019, after considering the evidence, I determined the issue of jurisdiction without formal reasons in order to allow a Preliminary Conference to be scheduled immediately. These reasons concern this initial finding and order in respect of jurisdiction.
Legislation
[7]	Section 157 (2) of the LVA provides: 
“(2) Subject to section 158, an appeal cannot be started after 60 days after the day of issue stated in the objection decision notice (the appeal period).”
[8]	Section 158 of the LVA provides:
“158 - Late filing 
(1) This section applies if a valuation appeal notice is filed after 
       the appeal period has ended. 
(2) The Land Court can hear the appeal only if— 
(a) the valuation appeal notice was filed 1 year or less after 
             the objection decision notice was issued; and 
(b) the appellant satisfies the court there was a reasonable 
             excuse for not filing the notice within the appeal period. 

Example of reasonable excuse— 

The notice of the valuer-general’s decision or the valuation appeal notice was lost or delayed in the ordinary course of post.”
Evidence
[9]	The main evidence provided to the Court by the applicants comprises the email correspondence referred to in paragraph [4] and admitted as Exhibit 2. No evidence was called by or on behalf of the respondent.
Submissions 
[10]	Neither party made any formal submissions to the Court, although a legal representative on behalf of the respondent advised that a finding of jurisdiction was not opposed.  
Conclusion 
[11]	An example of reasonable excuse set out in 158 of the LVA provides: “The notice of the Valuer-General’s decision or the valuation appeal notice was lost or delayed in the ordinary course of post.”
[12]	On the basis of the information provided by Mr Copley in Exhibit 2, I am satisfied that the proposed Notice of Appeal was delayed in the ordinary course of post and am therefore satisfied that reasonable excuse is established in the circumstances.
Order:
The Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal.