Brisbane City Council v James & St James Equipment Pty Ltd; St James Group Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council

[2011] QPEC 3

[2011] QPEC 3

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE EVERSON

P & E Appeal No 2291 of 2010

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL

Applicant

and

ROBERT ERNEST JAMES

Respondent

and

ST JAMES EQUIPMENT PTY LTD
ACN 129 518 789

and

ST JAMES GROUP PTY LTD
ACN 109 174 094

Respondent

and

Respondent

P & E Appeal No 3015 of 2008

ST JAMES GROUP PTY LTD
ACN 109 174 094  Appellant

and

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL                Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 09/02/2011

CATCHWORDS: ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING- R668 UCPR- extension of time for complying with order

ORDER

HIS HONOUR:  This is an application seeking an extension of time for complying with certain orders made by His Honour Judge Searles on 1 December 2010, following a successful mediation between the parties.  These orders were made in respect of two proceedings, an appeal against an enforcement notice (3015/08) and an originating application seeking declarations and enforcement orders (2291/10).  The application before me was filed in the latter proceeding but I am informed by Mr Taylor, who appears on behalf of the respondents in this proceeding, that it relates to both proceedings.

The orders disposed of both proceedings on terms unfavourable to the respondents in proceeding 2291/10, Robert Ernest James and the companies he controls.  It had the effect of bringing to an end a longstanding unlawful use of premises at 115 Lemke Road Taigum by Mr James and his companies.  Relevantly, he had to remove "all vehicles, plant and equipment on the premises" by 31 January 2001.  This has not occurred, giving rise to the application before me today. 

The principal bases for the application are that Mr James believed that he would be able to enter into a lease of alternative premises for the storage of the vehicles, plant and equipment at the time he consented to the orders but this did not eventuate and that the flooding of Brisbane in January further frustrated his efforts to relocate these items. 
Rule 668 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 clearly gives me the power to allow an extension of time for complying with the obligations referred to above and ceasing the unlawful use of the premises. I am concerned that Mr James and his companies are currently in contempt of the orders. I am not satisfied that all reasonable steps have been taken to comply with the orders in circumstances where a significant unlawful use has apparently been undertaken on the premises for some time. I have expressly warned Mr Taylor that any further non compliance will most likely result in contempt proceedings which are likely to have potentially serious consequences for Mr James and his companies.

For present purposes however I am prepared to grant an extension of time to allow compliance with the orders but only to the minimum extent necessary.  I am informed by Mr Taylor that if the time for compliance is extended to 6 a.m. on 28 February 2011 compliance with the orders can occur.  An order to this extent is not opposed by Mr Godfrey, who appears on behalf of the Brisbane City Council. 

I therefore order that the time for complying with paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the orders of His Honour Judge Searles dated 1 December 2010 be extended to 6 a.m. on 28 February 2011. 

‑‑‑‑‑