Gerhardt v Brisbane City Council

[2017] QCA 285

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Catchwords

1. Environment and Planning
2. › Planning schemes and instruments
3. › Queensland
4. › Development assessment
5. › Concurrence agency jurisdiction
6. › Whether local government a concurrence agency for demolition code assessment
7. › Whether declaration under planning scheme engaged item 17 of Schedule 7
8. › Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), ss 247, 282, 285, 286(1), 287, 288(2)
9. › Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 (Qld), sch 7, item 17
10. › Brisbane City Plan 2014, s 1.7.4
1. Environment and Planning
2. › Planning schemes and instruments
3. › Queensland
4. › Private certifiers
5. › Power to issue development permits
6. › Whether preliminary approval required before development permit issued
7. › Building Act 1975 (Qld), s 83(1)(b)
8. › Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), ss 241, 243
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Construction of planning instruments
3. › Planning schemes construed as statutes
4. › Harmonious construction of regulatory scheme
5. › Whether implied declaration could be inferred from planning scheme
6. › Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28

Quick Take

Under the Brisbane City Plan 2014, Schedule 7, Table 1, item 17 of the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 (Qld) does not confer concurrence agency jurisdiction on Brisbane City Council to assess building development applications against the demolition code. Where demolition of pre-1946 houses within the Traditional building character overlay is proposed, a separate application for development approval must be made directly to the Council for assessment against the demolition code, and a preliminary approval from the Council is a necessary prerequisite before a private certifier can issue a development permit under s 83(1)(b) of the Building Act 1975 (Qld).