Zilzie Pty Ltd v Rockhampton Regional Council

[2011] QPEC 44

[2011] QPEC 44

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT

JUDGE ROBIN QC

P & E Appeal No 3864 of 2010

ZILZIE PTY LTD	Appellant
and
ROCKHAMPTON REGIONAL COUNCIL AND ANOTHER	Respondents

BRISBANE

..DATE 09/03/2011

..DAY 1

ORDER

CATCHWORDS

Sustainable Planning act 2009 s 482(1)(a)
Acts Interpretation Act 1954 s 39A(1)(a)

Directions given for progress of developer appeal to a hearing notwithstanding late notice of it to Department of Environment and Resource Management (which had requested to be treated as a submitter) and uncertain as to when a neighbouring owner resident in Victoria would have received notice of the development application during public notification

HIS HONOUR:  The court makes an order in terms of the initialled draft establishing directions for future conduct of this developer appeal. 

It contains indulgences for the appellant in two respects. The first relates to giving notice of this appeal to the parties entitled to receive that within 10 business days under section 482(1)(a) of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009.

The Department of Environment and Resource Management was an advice agency which requested that it be treated as a submitter.  Accordingly, it comes within paragraph (v).  The appellant and its advisers overlooked that and while everyone else entitled to be served under section 482 was covered DERM was not, until the 24th of January 2011.  Since then the Department has had ample time to look after its interests in the appeal it's the practical course that that relief be given.

The other matter concerns what might be called a theoretical deficiency in the time allowed to a neighbour of the applicant/appellant's site to make a submission. That neighbour resided in Victoria. It's unknown when the notice sent actually arrived. The court is told that the Acts Interpretation Act in effect provides a formula for calculating the time that would be taken for addressees in various locations to be effectively served. See section 39A(1)(a). This seems to be very much a theoretical figure. The court is prepared to assume that that Victorian addressee has otherwise been given adequate opportunity to look to protection of any relevant interests.

Order as per initialled draft.

-----