Nielson v Brisbane City Council

[2011] QPEC 115

[2011] QPEC 115

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E Appeal No 1665 of 2011

GENNY LESLEY NIELSON	Appellant
and
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL	Respondent
And
CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT	Co-Respondent
And
ST JAMES GROUP PTY LTD	Co-Respondent

BRISBANE

..DATE 28/07/2011

JUDGMENT

CATCHWORDS

Directions hearing - submitter appellant who has a heritage property next to co-respondent developer's site allowed limited further time to raise additional issues - not reasonable to restrict her to issues in notice of appeal
HIS HONOUR:  The issue before the court on this directions hearing is whether the appellant ought to be allowed additional time to raise issues in the appeal.  Ms Evans for the first co-respondent developer opposed that.  It would have the effect of blowing out her proposed timetable to the extent that a November hearing would not be possible but a December one would. 

No prejudice was asserted from that one month's delay.  Rather, the opposition to Mr Connor's wish - his client have a possibility of notifying further issues within the next week - was that the appellant ought to have got things right in the notice of appeal filed on the 19th of May 2011.  Mr Connor is today not clear whether there may be additional issues notified.  In my opinion, the appellant ought to have the possibility she wants to reserve in the circumstances. 

It is something like a counsel of perfection, in my view, to require a notice of appeal which has to be prepared and filed within a strict time limit to get all the issues correct.  That may be particularly the case in circumstances like the present where there are heritage issues relating to the appellant's property, she being a neighbour of the site.  Pertinent issues may be revealed on disclosure. 

I'm alert to the reservations held about litigants fishing out a case.  I think that in this jurisdiction, where public interest issues are important, it's preferable for litigants in the court to have access to more information relevant to a development application rather than less.

Orders as per initialled draft.

-----