Spars Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council - [2007] QLC 23

LAND COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Spars Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [2007] QLC 0023

PARTIES: Spars Pty Ltd (ACN: 113 327 905) as trustee
(applicant)

v.

Brisbane City Council
(respondent)

FILE NO: A2007/0024

DIVISION: Land Court of Queensland

PROCEEDING: An application for declarations and other relief.

DELIVERED ON: 12 April 2007

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

MEMBER: Mr RS Jones

ORDERS:
The application is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: Land Court Act 2000 – jurisdiction of the Land Court – statutory construction – Acquisition of Land Act 1967.

APPEARANCES: Mr G Allan with Mr P Walker of counsel instructed by Conomos Lawyers, for the applicant.
Mr M Hinson SC with Mr S McLeod of counsel instructed by D L A Phillips Fox for the respondent.

Spars Pty Ltd, the applicant, seeks declarations and orders from this Court concerning steps taken by the respondent, the Brisbane City Council, to resume land from it under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967. The land intended to be resumed is required to accommodate a part of the major road works project known as the "Hale Street Link". As I understand it, there is a degree of urgency associated with the dealing of this application as at least some of the works associated with this project are scheduled to commence on 1 June 2007.

Background

On or about 17 November 2006 the respondent served on the applicant a notice of intention to resume pursuant to the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 (ALA). This notice notified the applicant that the whole of its land described as lots 1 and 2 on Registered Plan 903012 Parish of South Brisbane, comprising a total area of 8825m² was to be resumed for "Road Purposes". This was objected to by the applicant and on 21 December 2006 the respondent served on the applicant a notice pursuant to s.16 of the ALA discontinuing the resumption.
Also, on 21 December 2006 the respondent served on the applicant a second notice of intention to resume. This document notified the applicant that lots 1 and 2 were to be resumed for "road purposes and a purpose (construction area) Incidental to road purposes."
The applicant objected to the second notice of intention to resume and on 2 February 2007 an objection hearing was held. Following this hearing and the preparation of a report prepared by the respondent's delegate, Dr N G Divett, dealing with the applicant's points of objection, on 9 March 2007 the respondent served on the applicant a further document stated to be a "Notice of Intention to Resume".
The notice of 9 March 2007 relevantly provides:
"Whereas by a Notice of Intention to Resume under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 and dated the 21^st day of December 2006, it was notified that it was intended to take the land described in schedule 1 thereto for road purposes and a purpose (construction area) incidental to road purposes, and whereas the Brisbane City Council now considers that the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Spars Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2007] QLC 23
Decision Date: 12 April 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter between Spars Pty Ltd and the Brisbane City Council was determined in the Queensland Land Court. The dispute centred on the jurisdiction of the Land Court to hear an appeal concerning the acquisition of land by the Council. The Acquisition of Land Act 1967 was invoked, alongside the provisions of the Land Court Act 2000, to determine the scope of the court's authority in the matter. The fundamental issue the court needed to address was whether the Land Court had the statutory authority to hear an appeal under section 33 of the Acquisition of Land Act 1967, in relation to an acquisition decision made by the Brisbane City Council.

The court embarked on a detailed examination of the statutory provisions, specifically focusing on the language of the Land Court Act 2000. It scrutinised the legislative intent and context, as well as the purpose behind the establishment of the Land Court. The court concluded that the statutory language did not confer the requisite jurisdiction upon the Land Court to hear appeals against acquisition decisions made by the Brisbane City Council under the Acquisition of Land Act 1967. The reasoning hinged on the interpretation of the statutory provisions, which did not explicitly include acquisition appeals within the court's jurisdiction.

Consequently, the court determined that it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the appeal brought by Spars Pty Ltd. This decision was grounded in the court's interpretation of the legislative framework and its finding that the statutory provisions did not support the court's authority to hear such appeals. As a result, the application was dismissed. The court's findings and reasoning were clear and definitive, ensuring that the legal framework governing land acquisition and appeals was upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

The application is dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Spars Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [2007] QLC 0023
PARTIES:	Spars Pty Ltd (ACN: 113 327 905) as trustee (applicant)
v.
Brisbane City Council (respondent)
FILE NO:	A2007/0024
DIVISION:	Land Court of Queensland
PROCEEDING:	An application for declarations and other relief.
DELIVERED ON:	12 April 2007
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
MEMBER:	Mr RS Jones
ORDERS:	The application is dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	Land Court Act 2000 – jurisdiction of the Land Court – statutory construction – Acquisition of Land Act 1967.
APPEARANCES:	Mr G Allan with Mr P Walker of counsel instructed by Conomos Lawyers, for the applicant. Mr M Hinson SC with Mr S McLeod of counsel instructed by D L A Phillips Fox for the respondent.