East Melbourne Group Inc v Minister for Planning

The East Melbourne Group Inc challenged the Minister for Planning's decision to amend the Melbourne Planning Scheme to exempt a proposed Hilton Hotel from a notification requirement. The matter was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicants contended that the Minister's decision was flawed on various grounds, including unreasonableness, consideration of irrelevant factors, and improper purpose. They also questioned whether the Minister was required to afford procedural fairness to local residents and the role of departmental documents in explaining the basis of the decision.

The court examined the legal principles governing the Minister's powers under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. It considered whether the Minister was bound to follow the planning provisions and directions, and if departmental staff were required to consult with local residents. The court also assessed the nature of the privative clause in section 39(7) of the Act, which limits judicial review of the Minister's decisions. The court determined that the Minister was not bound to follow the planning provisions and directions, and that departmental staff were not required to consult with local residents. The court found that the Minister's decision was not unreasonable, irrelevant considerations were not taken into account, and there was no improper purpose.

The court concluded that the privative clause in section 39(7) of the Act did not entirely exclude judicial review, but that the scope of review was limited. The court found that the Minister's decision was not affected by jurisdictional error and that the applicants were not entitled to the reliefs sought. The applicants' appeal was dismissed, and the Minister's decision to amend the planning scheme was upheld.

No further orders were made.