Strawbridge & Anor and Western Australian Planning Commission

Strawbridge and another, the applicants, appealed a decision of the Western Australian Planning Commission, which had refused their application for subdivision of land in the East Wanneroo area. The applicants sought a review of the Commission's decision on the grounds that the refusal was unreasonable and not in accordance with the planning framework for the area. The Supreme Court of Western Australia was tasked with determining whether the Commission's decision was lawful and if the applicants' appeal should be upheld.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the proposed subdivision was contrary to the existing planning framework, specifically the East Wanneroo Land Use and Water Management Strategy, and whether the refusal was unreasonable given the applicants' entitlement to develop the land. The court had to consider the protection of agricultural land, the water restrictions in place, and the potential impact on the rural character of the locality. The applicants argued that the refusal was unreasonable as there was no mandatory requirement for a reticulated potable water supply in Rural Residential zones and that the draft strategy did not provide a sufficient basis for denying the subdivision application.

The court found that the Commission's decision to refuse the subdivision was indeed unreasonable. The East Wanneroo Land Use and Water Management Strategy, while still in draft form, provided a clear direction for the future development of the area, emphasising the protection of agricultural land and the preservation of the rural character. However, the court noted that the strategy's provisions were not yet legally binding, and there was no clear evidence that the applicants' subdivision would significantly impact the rural character or agricultural use of the land. The court further held that the requirement for a reticulated potable water supply was not a mandatory condition in the Rural Residential zones, and the applicants had not been provided with sufficient reasons for denying the application based on water supply concerns. The appeal was allowed, and the Commission's decision was quashed.

The court ordered that the application for review be allowed and that the decision of the Western Australian Planning Commission be quashed. The matter was remitted to the Commission for reconsideration in light of the court's findings, ensuring that any new decision would be in accordance with the relevant planning laws and the protection of the agricultural land and rural character of the East Wanneroo area.