Proctor v Brisbane City Council & Ors

(1993) 81 LGERA 398; [1993] QCA 440

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Local Government
2. › Planning and Environment
3. › Conditions of approval
4. › Subdivision
5. › Whether condition relevant or reasonably required
6. › Test under s 6.1(1)(c) Local Government (Planning & Environment) Act 1990 (Qld)
7. › Whether P&E Court applied wrong legal test by confining consideration to sterilisation and landlocking
1. Local Government
2. › Planning and Environment
3. › Conditions of approval
4. › Subdivision
5. › Power to impose condition requiring access across subdivided lot for benefit of adjoining land
6. › Whether condition compelling one owner to confer private right on another is beyond power
7. › Local Government (Planning & Environment) Act 1990 (Qld), ss 5.1, 6.1(1)(c)
1. Local Government
2. › Planning and Environment
3. › Statutory construction
4. › Meaning of 'relevant or reasonably required'
5. › Whether 'relevant' adds to 'reasonably required'
6. › Local Government (Planning & Environment) Act 1990 (Qld), s 6.1(1)(c)
7. › Local Government Act 1936 (Qld), s 33(16C)
1. Appeal
2. › Planning and Environment Court
3. › Appeal on question of law only
4. › Whether error or mistake in law demonstrated
5. › Local Government (Planning & Environment) Act 1990 (Qld), s 7.4(3)

Quick Take

The statutory test under s 6.1(1)(c) of the Local Government (Planning & Environment) Act 1990 (Qld) — that conditions must be 'relevant or reasonably required' — should be construed broadly, consistently with the High Court's approach in Cardwell Shire Council v King Ranch. A condition requiring road access across a subdivided lot for the benefit of adjoining land is within power and does not amount to compelling one owner to confer a private right on another. The word 'relevant' in s 6.1(1)(c) may have independent operation from 'reasonably required', such that a condition not strictly required by the subdivision may still be lawful if relevant to the local authority's planning functions.