Leahy v Brisbane City Council

In Leahy v Brisbane City Council, Mr Leahy challenges the decision of the Brisbane City Council to approve the installation of an electronic advertising billboard on 43 Musgrave Road. The decision was made under the Advertisements Local Law 2013, and the billboard obstructs Mr Leahy’s view from his property on 51 Musgrave Road, which is adjacent to the boundary of 43 Musgrave Road. Mr Leahy contends that the Council did not afford him procedural fairness, that it failed to consider relevant factors, and that it improperly compared the proposed sign to a different one. The Council, on the other hand, asserts that Mr Leahy was not aggrieved by the decision and that the application is out of time.

The court examined the reasonableness of the time taken by Mr Leahy to apply for judicial review and whether an extension of time should have been granted. The court considered several factors, including the extent of the delay, the effect on Mr Leahy if the application was refused, and the seriousness of the consequences of any error to him. The court also assessed whether procedural fairness was owed to Mr Leahy and if the Council failed to consider relevant factors. The court found that Mr Leahy was aggrieved by the decision and that the application was within a reasonable time, warranting an extension. Furthermore, the court determined that procedural fairness was not applicable, and the Council did not fail to consider relevant factors.

The court quashed the decision of the Brisbane City Council to approve the construction of the electronic advertising billboard on 43 Musgrave Road. The court ordered the Council to further consider the application for approval of the sign. The court also set out a timetable for the parties to file and serve written submissions on costs, with an option for oral submissions if an application was made by a specified date.