Gladstone Regional Council v Homes R Us (Australia) Pty Ltd

(2015) 209 LGERA 302; [2015] QCA 175

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Environment and Planning
2. › Development approvals
3. › Reconfiguration of lots
4. › Multiple development approvals for same land
5. › Whether assessable development commenced
6. › Whether completion of operational works constitutes commencement of reconfiguration
7. › Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), ss 10, 243, 578
1. Environment and Planning
2. › Development approvals
3. › Code assessment
4. › Relevant considerations
5. › Whether developer's purpose of reducing infrastructure charges is a relevant consideration
6. › Whether matters extraneous to planning provisions may be considered
7. › Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), ss 313(2), 313(3), 324(2)
1. Environment and Planning
2. › Development approvals
3. › Conditions of approval
4. › Infrastructure charges
5. › Whether developer who completed operational works under earlier approval took benefit of that approval
6. › Whether developer bound by infrastructure charge conditions of earlier approval when seeking new approval
7. › Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), ss 245, 347(1), 379-381
1. Environment and Planning
2. › Development approvals
3. › Adequacy of reasons
4. › Planning and Environment Court
5. › Whether primary judge gave adequate reasons for distinguishing authorities and rejecting discretionary refusal arguments

Quick Take

Completion of operational works pursuant to an operational works permit does not constitute commencement of the assessable development of 'reconfiguring a lot' authorised by a reconfiguration approval; reconfiguration occurs only upon registration of a plan of subdivision. A developer's purpose of reducing infrastructure charges by obtaining a new development approval under amended legislation is not a relevant consideration in code assessment, which must be conducted against the planning provisions specified in s 313(2) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld). The Genamson/Peet principle that a developer who takes the benefit of a development approval cannot avoid its burdens applies only where the assessable development authorised by the approval has actually taken place.