Re Palmer and Minister for the Capital Territory1
| Author | Peter Wood |
| Published date | 01 June 1979 |
| Date | 01 June 1979 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0067205X7901000205 |
| Subject Matter | Case Note |
CASE NOTE
RE
PALMER
AND
MINISTER
FOR
THE
ICAPIT
AL
TERRITORYl
Adfninistrative Appeals Tribunal
Act
-
SSe
28;
37
-Rates Ordinance
(A.C.T.) -Administrative decision -Decisionmaker required to give
reasons -Reasons
must
be intelligible, relevant and adequQte -
Disclosure
of
reasons insufficient.
Mr
&Mrs H.D. Palmer live
at
101 Strickland Ctescent, Deakin
A.C.T.: they are joint owners
of
Block 1Section 56 Division Deakin.
Late in 1977 they received aletter from the Minister for the C'apital
Territory notifying them that the unimproved value2of their land as
at
30.6.77 was determined to be $17,000 for the purpose
of
rating
under
S. 13
of
the Rates Ordinance 1967 (A.C.T.). Section
29(1)
of the Rates
Ordinance provides
that
an
owner dissatisfied with adetermination
may make application for avariation to
that
determination
on
the basis
of reasons set
out
in the application.
On
7.10.1977
Mr
Palmer
wrote to
the Department seeking avariation in the determination to afigure
of
$6,000, supporting this contention on four grounds:
1.
The
MinisteT's original valuation was contrary to S. 5of the Rates
Ordinance.
2.
The
determination was excessive in all the circumstances.
3.
The
determination was in excess of the capital fund
that
might be
expected to have been offered
on
30.6.77 for the lease.
4.
The
determination was inconsistent.
However, after receiving advice from the Chief
Val~er
of the
Australian Taxation Office, the Minister,
under
s.29(2)
of
the Rates
Ordinance, confirmed the determination and
so
notified the Palmers.
Undaunted, the owners applied
under
S.
30A
of
the Rates Ordinance,
to the Administrative Appeals T'ribunal to review the decision of the
Minister confirming the redetermination of the unimproved value
of
the land
at
$17,000 and gave notice pursuant to
s.
28(
1)
of
the
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
(Cth)
to the Minister
requesting him to provide
"a
statement in writing setting
out
the findings
on material questions of fact, referring to the evidence
or
other
material
on which those findings were based, and giving the reasons for the
decision". To this request the
Department
replied on 6.2.78 attaching a
letter from the Chief Valuer, the Australian Taxation Office to the
Department of the Capital Territory (dated 5.1.78) in which it was stated
that all
Mr
Palmer's objections in his letter of 7.10.77 to the determin-
ationhad beenconsidered,yet itwas recommended
that
the determination
be confirmed for there was no basis for the assertion
that
the determin-
1[1979] 1A.L.D. 183. Administrative Appeals Tribunal; Fisher
J.
(Deputy
President), A. N. Hall (Senior
Member),
C. A. Woodley
(Member).
2The capital sum which might be expected to have been offered for the lease
of
the parcel
of
land
on
certain assumptions: Rates Ordinance 1967,
s.
5.
197
To continue reading
Request your trial