Maidment Holdings P/L v Townsville City Council

[2006] QPEC 45

[2006] QPEC 045

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT
CIVIL JURISDICTION

JUDGE RACKEMANN

No BD1165 of 2006

MAIDMENT HOLDINGS PTY LTD TRADING AS	Applicant
MAIDMENT DEVELOPMENTS
and
TOWNSVILLE CITY COUNCIL	Respondent
BRISBANE ..DATE 28/04/2006
ORDER

28042006 T05/KLN16 M/T CMS47/2006 (Rackemann DCJ)

HIS HONOUR: This matter has been filed in Brisbane, as indeed	1
has the somewhat related appeal. Whilst the Court is often sympathetic to requests to transfer a matter for hearing to the local government area in which the matter originates, the policy reasons underlying that are stronger in the case of

10

appeals being heard on their merits, than in respect of
declaratory proceedings regarding the lawfulness of
conditions, which are often resolved by reference to the
affidavit material and oral argument. In this case the

parties are represented by barristers who are in Brisbane.

20

Mr Bain pointed out that it cannot be assumed that the affidavit material would not result in a requirement to cross- examine witnesses who are not based in Brisbane and that difficulties may arise as a result thereof. However, at this

30

stage, it seems to me that it would be appropriate to make the
directions which are requested by the applicant.

If, when the affidavit material is filed and exchanged, it becomes evident that there will be a need for cross-

40

examination which cannot be done by telephone, but requires
cross-examination of a witness present in Court, and if that
creates manifest inconvenience, then of course, the respondent
would be at liberty to apply to transfer the forum at that

stage, but at this stage, I am minded to make the directions

50

as requested by the applicant.

...

2 ORDER 60

28042006 T05/KLN16 M/T CMS47/2006 (Rackemann DCJ)

I order as per the amended draft initialled by me and placed	1
with the papers.

-----

10

20

30

40

50

3 ORDER 60