Stubberfield v Brisbane City Council

[1994] HCATrans 315

~

~ -,~)1'

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Brisbane No B24 of 1993

B e t w e e n -

JOHN RICHARD STUBBERFIELD

Applicant

and

BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL

First Respondent

MALCOLM VICTOR NEWING

Second Respondent

Office of the Registry

Brisbane No B27 of 1993

B e t w e e n -

JOHN RICHARD STUBBERFIELD

Applicant

Stubberfield	1	10/5/94
MASON CJ DEANE J TOOHEY J GAUDRON J McHUGH J

and

REDLAND SHIRE COUNCIL

First Respondent

PARADISE GROVE PTY LTD

Second Respondent

Applications for special leave

to appeal

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON TUESDAY, 10 MAY 1994, AT 10.20 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

DEANE J: These two applications for special leave to appeal

were considered by Justices Toohey, McHugh and

myself. They were applications for special leave

to appeal in planning cases. The Court has, in the

past, made clear that it will not grant special

leave to appeal in planning cases unless an

applicant can:

establish, at least, that it involves a

fundamental question of general principle,

whether arising by way of construction of a

statute or otherwise.

See Courtney Hill Pty Ltd v South Australian

Planning Commission, (1991) 65 ALJR 348.

Appeals in these matters would involve no such

question of general principle; to the contrary,

they would turn very much on their own particular

facts. Accordingly, the application for special

leave to appeal is refused in each case.

AT 10.21 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE

Stubberfeld 10/5/94