CANAL ROCKS PTY LTD and WESTERN AUSTRALIAN PLANNING COMMISSION

The applicant, Canal Rocks Pty Ltd, sought a review of a decision by the respondent, the Western Australian Planning Commission, under section 31 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA). The dispute pertained to the planning approval for a development project by Canal Rocks Pty Ltd. The application was opposed by a proposed intervener, who sought to challenge the decision on the basis of alleged procedural flaws. The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the proceeding through mediation facilitated by the Tribunal. The central legal issue before the court was whether the parties should be required to proceed by way of consent orders, given their agreement in principle, and whether the proposed intervener had a right to review the decision.

The court examined the statutory framework under the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA) and relevant case law to determine the appropriate course of action. It considered the parties' agreement in principle, which suggested that the dispute was effectively resolved. The court noted that in Western Australia, there is no third-party right of review, which further complicated the intervener's standing. The court held that requiring the parties to proceed by way of consent orders was appropriate, as it aligned with the principles of efficiency and finality in dispute resolution. The court also determined that the proposed intervener did not have standing to challenge the decision.

In light of the agreement in principle and the lack of standing for the intervener, the court dismissed the application for a review of the respondent's decision. The court further ordered that the parties proceed by way of consent orders to formalise their resolution. This decision underscores the importance of adhering to mediation agreements and the limited scope for third-party intervention in planning disputes under Western Australian law.