SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Johnston v Brisbane City Council & Ors [2014] QSC 268
PARTIES:
NICOLE JOHNSTON
(applicant)
v
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL
(first respondent)
and
SIMONE BAIN
(second respondent)
and
MICHAEL HALLIDAY
(third respondent)
and
RAY OVENS
(fourth respondent)FILE NO/S:
BS4250/14
DIVISION:
Trial
PROCEEDING:
Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court
DELIVERED ON:
30 October 2014
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
12 August 2014
JUDGE:
Alan Wilson J
ORDERS:
That Orders/Recommendations made by the Panel in its Report dated 31 March 2014:1.
That Councillor Johnston make an oral apology in person in the Council Chambers in the terms of the Schedule to the Report during the course of the next Ordinary Council meeting attended by her; and(a)
That the Panel requests that the Chief Executive Officer provide a copy of the Executive Summary of the Report and consider providing a copy of the Report of the Panel to the Chief Executive Local Government with a view if thought appropriate to amend relevant legislation to empower the Minister to remove or suspend a Brisbane City Councillor for misconduct as may be found by the Panel(b)
be declared void and set aside;
That the respondents pay two-thirds of the applicant’s assessed costs.2.
CATCHWORDS:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT – REGULATION AND ADMINISTRATION – MEETINGS – PRESERVING ORDER AND EXCLUSION OF COUNCILLOR OR ALDERMAN – where the applicant is a Brisbane City Councillor – where the first respondent Brisbane City Council Councillor Conduct Review Panel is a body established under and governed by the City of Brisbane Act 2010 (Qld) – where a decision was made by the Panel in respect of the applicant, ordering her to pay a fine and apologise in specified terms, following a complaint by another Councillor – where that same Councillor made a second complaint after the applicant failed to deliver the apology – where the Panel made a second decision again ordering an apology in the same terms – where the applicant seeks judicial review of the Panel’s second decision on three alleged grounds of jurisdictional error, either under the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld) or the court’s inherent jurisdiction – whether the court has jurisdiction to review decisions made by the Panel under the City of Brisbane Act 2010 (Qld), and whether the second decision is open to review for jurisdictional error
Brisbane City Council Meetings Subordinate Local Law 2005, s 25, s 47
City of Brisbane Act 2010 (Qld), s 178, s 179, s 180, s 183, s 183A, s 186A, s 187, s 226, Ch 6 Pt 2 Div 6, Ch 6 Pt 2 Div 7
Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), s 10
Judicial Review Act 1999 (Qld), s 20, s 30, s 41, s 47, s 49, Pt 3, Pt 4, Pt 5
Local Government and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2012 (Qld), s 33
Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991, s 119
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), s 681BM Alliance Coal Operations Pty Ltd v BGC Contracting Pty Ltd & Ors
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Johnston v Brisbane City Council 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2014] QSC 268
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether it had jurisdiction to review the Panel’s decisions under the City of Brisbane Act 2010 (Qld). The court held that it did have jurisdiction to review the Panel’s decisions, as the Panel is a statutory body established under the Act, and the Act provides for judicial review of its decisions. The court also considered whether the second decision of the Panel was open to review for jurisdictional error. The applicant argued that the second decision was flawed because it was not a fresh decision, but rather a reiteration of the first decision. However, the court held that the second decision was a valid decision made in response to the applicant’s failure to deliver the required apology, and was not flawed in any way.
In light of the above, the court set aside the Orders/Recommendations made by the Panel in its Report dated 31 March 2014. The court also ordered that the respondents pay two-thirds of the applicant’s assessed costs. The court held that the second decision of the Panel was not flawed in any way, and was a valid decision made in response to the applicant’s failure to deliver the required apology. The court found that the Panel had jurisdiction to make the second decision, and that the decision was not open to review for jurisdictional error.
In conclusion, the court held that it had jurisdiction to review the Panel’s decisions, and that the second decision of the Panel was valid and not open to review for jurisdictional error. The court set aside the Orders/Recommendations made by the Panel, and ordered that the respondents pay two-thirds of the applicant’s assessed costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
That Orders/Recommendations made by the Panel in its Report dated 31 March 2014:1.
That Councillor Johnston make an oral apology in person in the Council Chambers in the terms of the Schedule to the Report during the course of the next Ordinary Council meeting attended by her; and(a)
That the Panel requests that the Chief Executive Officer provide a copy of the Executive Summary of the Report and consider providing a copy of the Report of the Panel to the Chief Executive Local Government with a view if thought appropriate to amend relevant legislation to empower the Minister to remove or suspend a Brisbane City Councillor for misconduct as may be found by the Panel(b)
be declared void and set aside;
That the respondents pay two-thirds of the applicant’s assessed costs.2.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.