Hicks and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development - [2016] AATA 437

Hicks and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development [2016] AATA 437 (28 June 2016)

Division

GENERAL DIVISION

File Number(s)

2016/0986

Re

John Hicks

APPLICANT

Gold Coast Lifestyle Association Incorporated

OTHER PARTY

Tugun Cobaki Alliance Incorporated

OTHER PARTY

And

Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development

RESPONDENT

Gold Coast Airport Pty Ltd

OTHER PARTY

Airservices Australia

OTHER PARTY

INTERLOCUTORY DECISIONS & DIRECTIONS

Tribunal
Deputy President Bernard J McCabe

Date 28 June 2016

Place
Brisbane

Standing

The Tribunal ORDERS that:

     1. The Applicant, John Hicks, does not have standing to bring this Application;
     2. Gold Coast Lifestyle Association Incorporated (GCAPL) be joined as the first Applicant;
     3. Tugun Cobaki Alliance Incorporated be joined as the second Applicant;
     4. Gold Coast Airport Pty Ltd be joined as the second respondent;
     5. Airservices Australia be joined as the third respondent;

Stay request

The Tribunal DIRECTS that:

6. Within 21 days of the date of these reasons, Tugun Cobaki Alliance Incorporated (the ‘Alliance’) lodge with the Tribunal and give to the respondent, GCAPL and Airservices Australia, submissions and evidence in relation to the request for a Stay pursuant to s 41(2) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth);

Section 35 confidentiality request

     7. Whereas the respondent has written submissions in its possession that were obtained in the course of the public consultation process, the Tribunal DIRECTS that:

(a) the respondent redact from those submissions any personal details that identify the authors of those submissions; and
(b) the respondent provide redacted copies of the documents to the other parties; and
(c) the respondent shall not provide un-redacted copies of those documents to any person except as required for the purposes of conducting these proceedings.

Non-party access to documents

Tribunal ORDERS that:

     8. The request for non-party access to documents filed on 8 June 2016 is refused.

Case management directions

     9. The Tribunal’s directions of 13 May 2016 are varied in accordance with these reasons so that they now read:

5.   On or before 8 August 2016, the Tugun Cobaki Alliance Incorporated (TCAI) and the Gold Coast Lifestyle Association Incorporated (GCLAI) shall each lodge with the Tribunal and provide to each other party, a Statement of Facts, Issues and Contentions together with any other material they wish to rely upon at the hearing.

6.   On or before 10 October 2016, the MIRD, GCAPL and AA shall each lodge with the Tribunal and provide to each other party, a Statement of Facts, Issues and Contentions together with any other material they wish to rely upon at the hearing.

7.   On or before 7 November 2016, the TCAI and GCLAI lodge with the Tribunal and provide to the each other party any material in reply, or a letter stating they do not intend to provide any further material.

8.   The matter be listed for Mediation in the week commencing 14 November 2016.

9.   The matter be listed for hearing for 5 days commencing on 7 December 2016.

................................[Sgd]........................................
Deputy President Bernard J McCabe
Catchwords
STANDING – Minister’s decision…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Hicks and Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Developme... and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] AATA 437
Decision Date: 28 June 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered an application for review concerning the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development's approval of a Major Development Plan for an Instrument Landing System at the Gold Coast Airport. The primary applicant, Mr. Hicks, sought to challenge this decision, alongside other parties including the Lifestyle Association and an Alliance.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr. Hicks possessed the requisite standing to bring the application, meaning whether his interests were affected by the Minister's decision in a way that granted him a "special interest" in the subject matter. Additionally, the Tribunal addressed applications concerning confidentiality of public submissions, access to Tribunal documents by a non-party, and the potential for an interim stay of proceedings.

The Tribunal found that Mr. Hicks did not have standing to pursue the application, as his interests were not sufficiently affected by the decision to grant him a special interest. Consequently, his formal role in the proceedings concluded, though he was permitted to liaise with other organisations continuing their involvement. The Tribunal also granted an application for confidentiality orders regarding the redaction of personal details from public submissions, noting that this process had already commenced. Regarding access to Tribunal documents by a non-party, the Tribunal declined to depart from the usual rule, refusing the request and emphasising the existing transparency of the proceedings. The Tribunal indicated that directions for the future conduct of the proceedings would be amended to reflect the decision on standing and to incorporate the confidentiality orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

None of the parties spoke in favour of departing from the usual rule in relation to the non-party access. Several of them actively opposed relaxing the rule. Mr Duffy, for the Lifestyle Association, said there was nothing about this case that suggested it should be treated differently to other cases. I agree. Representatives of the media are entitled to attend the hearings. They are free to speak with the parties. When the evidence is presented, they will be free to see and hear it unless there are extraordinary circumstances which result in the hearing being closed. When the case is concluded, it is likely the decision and reasons will be published for all to see. The process is already being conducted in an open and transparent way; there is no justification for departing from the usual arrangements.Conclusion I have decided the applicant, Mr Hicks, does not have standing. That means he cannot bring or agitate an application for review of the decision in question. His formal role in these proceedings is therefore at an end – although he is free to liaise with the Lifestyle Association or the Alliance as they continue their involvement in the case. Of course, the involvement of those organisations will be limited by the scope of the decision under review. I propose inviting the respondent to draft and circulate directions under s 25(4A) to this end. Directions were made for the further conduct of these proceedings on 13 May 2016. The timetable contemplated in those directions remains in place although the precise terms of the directions will require amendment in light of the decision I have made in relation to standing. I will also make the directions I have foreshadowed in relation to the confidentiality orders.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Division	GENERAL DIVISION
File Number(s)	2016/0986
Re	John Hicks
APPLICANT Gold Coast Lifestyle Association Incorporated OTHER PARTY Tugun Cobaki Alliance Incorporated OTHER PARTY
And	Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development
RESPONDENT Gold Coast Airport Pty Ltd OTHER PARTY Airservices Australia OTHER PARTY

Tribunal	Deputy President Bernard J McCabe
Date	28 June 2016
Place	Brisbane