Brancatella v Brisbane City Council [2009] QPEC 42
1-1
[2009] QPEC 42
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT
JUDGE ROBIN QC
P & E Appeal No 3342 of 2008
VITO BRANCATELLA Appellant
and
BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL Respondent
BRISBANE
..DATE 29/04/2009
ORDER
CATCHWORDS: Planning and Environment Court Rules r 4, r 18(3)
- appellant seeks indulgence to permit his application for
directions to be heard notwithstanding that by reason of a
change in the Rules application 3 weeks after the appeal
started the application was out of time.
-- 1 of 4 --
1-2 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
HIS HONOUR: I'll write in at paragraph 21, "pursuant to rule
4, any non-compliance with rule 18(3) be excused to permit
this application for directions to be dealt with". Order as
per initialled draft.
...
-- 2 of 4 --
29042009 D.1 T(2)03/KDF(BRIS) M/T BRIS11 (Robin J)
1-3
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
HIS HONOUR: Order as per initialled draft.
...
HIS HONOUR: This is an application for directions by an
appellant which his Counsel, Mr Smith, informs the Court
appears to require an indulgence to permit it to be heard.
The new Planning and Environment Court Rules which came into
effect on the 22nd of December last year require such an
application to be brought within three months after the
originating process is filed.
The appeal was commenced on the 1st of December last year and
ordinarily changes to procedure apply retrospectively. Mr
Smith's approach is that the three months runs from the 1st of
December 2008. If that's right, it's likely that there are
many proceedings in which there is default. It plainly
assists the Court to administer its lists if matters are
brought before a Judge earlier rather than later so that their
progress can be monitored in reviews on fixed dates which the
parties know about.
It's appropriate for the Court to relieve Mr Smith's client
from whatever might be the consequences of non-compliance.
One wonders what those might be; they may be no more than the
Court having to bring a matter languishing on its lists before
a Judge for consideration as to what might happen. It will be
a considerable change in the culture of the Court if,
-- 3 of 4 --
29042009 D.1 T(2)03/KDF(BRIS) M/T BRIS11 (Robin J)
1-4
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
excepting a clear case where it was the just outcome, the
proceeding were summarily dismissed.
-----
-- 4 of 4 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QPEC/2009/042