Re Noble

The applicants, Joy Alison Noble and Geoffrey Paul Noble, as trustees, along with Theo Elenis and Anna Elenis, sought declarations that the resumption of their land by the Crown was unlawful. The land in question was situated within the Southbank Corporation Area, as defined by the Southbank Corporation Act 1989. The Chief Executive of the Department of Main Roads, acting on behalf of the State of Queensland, purported to resume the land for transport purposes under the Transport Planning and Coordination Act 1994 and the Acquisition of Land Act 1967. The applicants argued that the resumption was unlawful because the land could not be lawfully used for the specified purpose, given the constraints imposed by the Southbank Corporation Act.

The primary legal issues revolved around whether the Southbank Corporation Act bound the Crown and, if so, whether it precluded the use of the applicants' land for transport purposes. The applicants contended that the approved development plan within the Southbank Corporation Act did not permit the use of the land for transport purposes, rendering the resumption unlawful. The court had to determine if the Southbank Corporation Act imposed restrictions on the Crown's ability to resume the land for transport purposes and if these restrictions were enforceable against the Crown.

The court examined the language and provisions of the Southbank Corporation Act, including sections that established the corporation's comprehensive control over land use within the corporation area. The court noted that the corporation, acting as the State, had the exclusive authority to regulate development in the area. The approved development plan specifically excluded transport purposes for the applicants' land, further reinforcing the argument that the land could not be used for the purpose of the resumption. The court found that the Southbank Corporation Act did indeed bind the Crown, and the provisions of the Act precluded the use of the applicants' land for the purpose of the resumption. Consequently, the court held that the resumption of the applicants' land was unlawful.

The court granted the declarations sought by the applicants, confirming that the resumption of their land was unlawful. The court found that the Southbank Corporation Act's comprehensive scheme for land use control within the corporation area effectively bound the Crown, and the approved development plan did not permit the use of the applicants' land for transport purposes.