We Two Pty Ltd v Shorrock (No 2)

In We Two Pty Ltd v Shorrock (No 2), the court considered a dispute regarding the validity and enforceability of various planning and development approvals for a proposed outlet centre near Brisbane Airport. The applicant, We Two Pty Ltd, sought declarations concerning the approval of a Major Development Plan for the outlet centre by the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, and the legality of certain agreements and permits issued by Brisbane Airport Corporation (BAC) in relation to the development. The respondents, including Westfield, Centro, and Direct Factory Outlets Pty Ltd, contested the validity of these approvals and agreements, arguing that BAC lacked the authority to grant certain permits and that the development contravened the Airports Act 1996 (Cth) and related regulations.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Major Development Plan, works permits, and agreements between BAC and DFO were valid and enforceable, and if BAC had the authority to grant the necessary permits. The court had to examine the statutory framework governing airport development, the Airports Act 1996, and the Airports (Building Control) Regulations 1996, to determine the extent of BAC's powers and the legality of its actions.

In its reasoning, the court found that the Major Development Plan and associated permits were valid and effective, as they had been duly approved by the Minister for Transport and Regional Services. The court dismissed the contentions of the respondents that the Building Controller lacked the authority to issue the permits. The court also held that the agreements between BAC and DFO were lawful and did not contravene the Airports Act or the regulations. The declarations sought by DFO were largely denied, as the court found that the development plans were still conceptual and it was premature to make the declarations. However, the court did make specific declarations affirming the validity of the final Master Plan, the Major Development Plan, the works permits, and the lease agreements.

The final orders of the court were that the application by Westfield and Centro would be dismissed, and specific declarations regarding the validity of the Major Development Plan, works permits, and lease agreements were made in favour of BAC and DFO. The court reserved the question of costs for further hearing.