Muir v Logan City Council

[2009] QPEC 121

[2009] QPEC 121

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC  

P & E Appeal No 3556 of 2008

BRUCE WILLIAM MUIR

and

SUZANNE CAROL MUIR

Appellant

Appellant

and

LOGAN CITY COUNCIL

Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 01/10/2009

ORDER

CATCHWORDS:

Case management - whether mediation should be at 10:00am as desired by appellant or at 2:00pm as desired by Council to accommodate work commitments of its officers

HIS HONOUR:  The Court makes an order as per initialled draft.  It directs a mediation on the 16th of October at 2 p.m. and confirms a review on the 22nd of October.

Mr Muir representing himself and the other appellant prefers that the mediation be at 10 a.m. lest it not be completed in the time available, which would presumably be three hours.

On the 17th of September, 2009, when Judge Rackemann made orders, the Council had handed up a draft order directing mediation at 10.  The Court hears that his Honour expressed a view that the whole day ought to be made available for mediation, given his concern regarding the extent of the issues that it was indicated to him that everything in the notice of appeal was contentious.

No order was made for mediation, although the Registrar has pencilled in a three hour session at 10 a.m. on the 16th of October, 2009.

Ms Lewis for the Council tells the Court that although in open correspondence directed at complying with Judge Rackemann's order regarding identification of issues, everything remains in issue, there is "without prejudice" correspondence which greatly reduces the issues.  Ms Lewis says she is not at liberty to disclose to me the details of that.  Mr Muir expresses some concerns still at the extent of issues that might need to be canvassed.

Whatever the situation in that regard, it seems to me that a three hour session ought to be sufficient.

The Council's desire for a 2 p.m. start is attributable to the obligations of its various officers whose participation in the mediation would be required.

I understand that one of those officers at least is committed in the morning in a way that would preclude attendance, and that it may be that it is going to be inconvenient and disruptive of the Council's affairs if other officers have to attend then.

The Court ought to be sympathetic to accommodating the Council to enable its officers to go about its business without unnecessary interference attributable to the demands of the Court.  That on the 17th of September the Council had in mind a mediation exercise before lunch, as the draft order handed to his Honour and placed on the file indicates, does not in my view, given that there was no order for mediation made then, prevent it from changing its mind.

I make an order in terms of the initialled draft which adopts the 2 p.m. schedule.

‑‑‑‑‑