Ferreyra v Brisbane City Council (No 2)

In Ferreyra v Brisbane City Council (No 2), the appellant sought a review of a decision made by the Brisbane City Council, which had rejected the appellant's application for an amendment to the planning scheme. The dispute centred on the appellant's claim that the council's decision was unreasonable and that the council had failed to consider certain statutory obligations under the Planning Act 2016. The matter was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal.

The central legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and application of the Planning Act, specifically in relation to the grounds for review of planning decisions and the extent of the council's discretion in making those decisions. The appellant argued that the council had misapplied the statutory criteria and failed to adequately consider the impact of the proposed amendment on the surrounding environment. The council contended that its decision was well within its statutory powers and appropriately balanced the competing interests involved.

The court found that the council had correctly applied the statutory criteria in making its decision and had not erred in law. The judges held that the council's decision was not unreasonable, given the evidence and considerations before it. The court also found that the council had adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the proposed amendment. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs of the proceedings.