Guiseppe Genco and City of Melbourne v Paul Kenneth Salter and Building Appeals Board

Guiseppe Genco and City of Melbourne, represented by Genco, sought judicial review of decisions made by the Building Appeals Board (the Board) which upheld orders made by the municipal building surveyor concerning two apartment buildings. The surveyor had ordered the properties to be classified as Class 2 under the Building Code of Australia, as they were being used largely for short-term commercial stays, which are not permissible under that classification. The primary issue before the court was whether the Board's interpretation of "separate dwelling" in clause A3.2 of the Code was correct, and if the evidence justified the orders.

The court examined the statutory provisions and considered the duration of stays and hotel-like characteristics of the use of the properties. The court found that the Board had misdirected itself in interpreting the Class 2 requirements, and that the duration of stays and the hotel-like characteristics were not determinative of the classification. The court also held that the evidence did not justify the Board's orders, as the change of use did not result in danger.

In light of these findings, the appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the Building Appeals Board were set aside. The court's decision clarified the interpretation of "separate dwelling" in the Building Code of Australia and provided guidance on the factors to consider when determining the classification of properties under the Code.