English & Ors v Gold Coast City Council [2007] QPEC 10
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: English & Ors v Gold Coast City Council [2007] QPEC 010
PARTIES: GEORGE ROBERT ENGLISH and LYNDA KATHRYN
WHITFORD
First Applicants
And
REACTION BRAKE AND CLUTCH SERVICE PTY
LTD
Second Applicant
V
GOLD COAST CITY COUNCIL
Respondent
FILE NO/S: Southport 736/05
DIVISION: Planning and Environment
PROCEEDING: Originating Application for Declarations
ORIGINATING
COURT: Planning and Environment Court of Queensland, at Southport
DELIVERED ON: 26 February 2007
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 8 December 2006
JUDGE: Alan Wilson SC, DCJ
ORDER: Application dismissed
CATCHWORDS: PLANNING LAW – PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT –
PLANNING SCHEMES – CONSTRUCTION – WORDS
AND PHRASES – whether applicants’ premises fall within
definition of Catering Business in planning scheme
Cases considered:
ACR Trading Pty Ltd v Fat-Sel Pty Ltd (1987) 11 NSWLR 67
(CA)
Blacklade Investments Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council
(1980) 38 LGRA 360
CTS Strathpine Pty Ltd v Pine Rivers Shire Council [2006]
QPEC 111
-- 1 of 6 --
2
Cherrabun Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [1985] QPLR
205
Kingston Road Investments Pty Ltd v Logan City Council
[1999] QPELR 260
Westfield Management Ltd v Pine Rivers Shire Council
[2004] QPELR 337
Woolworths Ltd v Caboolture Shire Council [2004] QPELR
550
COUNSEL: J Houston for applicants
S Ure for respondent
SOLICITORS: Phillips Fox for applicants
King and Company for respondent
[1] Mr English and Ms Whitford are the owners of premises at 21 Barrine Drive,
Worongary where the second applicant, a company, of which they are the directors
and Mr English is the sole shareholder, carries on a business called Barrine Drive
Takeaway. Between April 2002 (when Mr English and Ms Whitford purchased the
premises) and May 2003 the company used the premises for the sale of takeaway
food such as fish and chips, hamburgers, pies, soft drinks, confectionary and
cigarettes.
[2] Since May 2003 they have used the site for the preparation of food which is loaded
into seven mobile food vans. The vans then go out to various locations on the Gold
Coast where they park and sell the food and also drinks, confectionary and the like.
The business operates between 4.15 am and about 3.15 pm Monday to Friday, and
6.00 am to 11.30 am on Saturday. It has 10 full-time employees.
[2][3] More precisely the applicants’ operations, as described in the court documents,
involve receiving deliveries of goods at the premises from 4.15am onwards each
weekday; the on-site preparation and manufacture of foodstuffs including salads,
pasta, pies, quiches, deep fried foods, cakes and beverages; the loading of the
foodstuffs and drinks (and confectionary) onto mobile vans for off-site distribution
and sale; the on-site storage of the vans, and their cleaning at the end of each day.
[2][4] The public do not purchase foodstuffs or other goods at the premises themselves.
[5] Under the 1995 Albert Shire Planning Scheme the land was situated in the Local
Shopping zone. Under the 2003 Gold Coast Planning Scheme it has been placed
within the Local Business Domain. The applicants seek a declaration that their use
of the land, which commenced at the time the old scheme was in force, falls within
the definition of Catering Business in that scheme, and is lawful.
[6] Council contends that the use is either Light Industry, or an innominate use. In the
Local Shopping zone light industry is a prohibited use, and an innominate use
would default to column 3 in the Table of Development and be classified as Consent
Development. A catering business is in column 1 in that Table, and is a permitted
development.
[6][7] The 1995 Scheme defines a Catering Business as:
-- 2 of 6 --
3
“Catering Business” - Any premises used or intended for use for the purpose of
any business included in Appendix 1 hereto:
Appendix 1
Café
Espresso Bar
Fast Food Outlet
Fried Food Outlet
Kiosk
Milk Bar
Reception Room or Function Room
Restaurant
Snack Bar
Tea Garden
Tea Room
The term does not include a hotel as herein defined.
[8] ‘Industry’ is defined in the scheme in these terms:
‘Industry’ – includes:
(1) Any of the following operations:-
(a) any manufacturing process whether or not such process results
in the production of a finished article;
(b) the breaking up or dismantling of any goods or articles for
trade, sale or gain, or ancillary to any business;
(c) the extraction of sand, gravel, clay, turf, soil, rock, ore, stone,
or similar substances from land;
(d) repairing and servicing of articles including vehicles,
machinery, buildings, or other structures;
(e) any operation connected with the installation of equipment and
services and the extermination of pests but not including on site
work on buildings or other structures or land;
(f) the dismantling of motor vehicles, whether the dismantling is
carried out by one operation or by a series of operations for any
purpose other than a car repair station, service station or junk
yard as herein defined; and
(2) any of the following ancillary operations when conducted on land upon
which any of the operations listed in (1) above are carried on:-
(a) the storage of goods used in connection with or resulting from
any of the above operations;
(b) the provision of amenities for persons engaged in such
operations;
(c) the sale of goods, resulting from such operations;
-- 3 of 6 --
4
(d) any work or administration or accounting in connection with
such operations provided that the use does not exceed 20% of
the total use area of any building or buildings so used;
(3) without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any industry or class of
industry particularly defined in this town planning scheme, but does not
include a home occupation as herein defined.
[9] The definition of Light Industry in the superseded planning scheme is as follows:
‘Light Industry’ – any premises used or intended for use for any purpose in
appendix III hereto, provided that it complies with the standards of Schedule A
and any other industry that complies with the standards of Schedule A.
Appendix III
(1) Purposes including or ancillary to any of the following:-
…
Food Stuff Manufacturing
…
[10] In a subtle argument Mr Houston of Counsel, for the applicants, submitted the
various businesses appearing in Appendix 1 to the definition of Catering Business
could be grouped into: (a) café, milk bar, snack bar and kiosk; (b) espresso bar, tea
garden and tea room; (c) restaurant; (d) fast food outlet, fried food outlet; and (e)
reception room, or function room. Each category, he said, indicated the definition
contemplated a wide range of establishments selling food and beverages, but with
differing levels of formality. He also pointed to some variations and overlapping
within the categories, like McDonalds Family Restaurants which might be
identifiable as both restaurants, and fast food outlets; and, restaurants of other kinds
which provide both dine-in and take-away services. Some would also, of course,
offer a delivery service.
[10][11] It is not too great a step, according to this submission, to accept that the pre-
prepared food produced at this business is, because it is to be provided without
delay, properly described by the phrase ‘fast food’; and, that the premises are
simply an ‘outlet’ at which that food is prepared, before distribution. In the result, it
was submitted, the business is properly described as a ‘fast food outlet’. (I was also
taken to the dictionary definition of ‘cater’ which, it is accepted, encompasses the
preparation of food at one place which is then transported to another for delivery,
distribution and consumption.)
[12] Council contends that the definition has to be considered within the wider context of
the planning scheme. The use involves transporting the ‘catering’ product away
from the immediate local area, when the Statement of Intent for the Local Shopping
Zone looks to premises like this for the satisfaction of local shopping and
commercial needs ‘essential to a residential community’. As Row DCJ said in
Blacklade Investments Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council (1980) 38 LGRA 360, at
363-4:
-- 4 of 6 --
5
The statement of intent provides guidelines as to the planning intent of the
respondent as set out in the legal provision of the town plan and is helpful in
determining how a discretion should be exercised. 1
[13] It has also been said, however, that phrases like this should not be construed too
pedantically 2 . Recently, in CTS Strathpine Pty Ltd v Pine Rivers Shire Council
[2006] QPEC 111 Rackemann DCJ was not persuaded that any special or particular
meaning, suggested by things like the Statement of Intent, could or should prevail if
the words under consideration have, themselves, an ordinary, plain, and apparent
meaning 3 .
[13][14] Neither approach avails the applicants. Read in conjunction with the Statement of
Intent, the definition of Catering Business in the 1995 scheme can only sensibly be
construed as envisaging something which involves a retail element on the premises
themselves and the provision of food, drink and refreshment both within, or within
and without the relevant premises, which can be accessed by the local community –
with, perhaps, the additional feature that some foodstuffs might be collected, or
delivered, from those premises.
[13][15] If the Statement of Intent is ignored, the result is the same. While the words
Catering Business might, without the particular descriptions of businesses set out in
Appendix 1, be thought to include the applicants’ operations, the term is plainly
qualified by its own apparent parameters, gleaned from the introductory phrase –
‘any premises used or intended for use for the purpose of any business included in
Appendix 1 hereto’. None of the listed types of business can be sensibly or
meaningfully stretched to describe the applicants’ operations on these premises.
[13][16] In particular, this business does not fall within the particular category in Appendix 1
relied upon by the applicants, a ‘fast food outlet’. There are ready examples of
businesses which plainly fall within that definition (McDonalds, Kentucky Fried
Chicken, Hungry Jacks, Pizza Hut, Dominoes, and Eagle Boys) some of which, I
accept, may not provide ‘dine-in’ facilities at all but are simply a venue for the
collection of foodstuffs; or, the place where they are made, and from whence they
are delivered.
[13][17] What distinguishes the applicants’ operation, again, is the absence of any on-site
retail element, when that is a common aspect of all of the businesses listed in
Appendix 1. The seven mobile food vans are the retail outlets, an aspect of the
operation which is alien to any of the ordinary activities associated with the
businesses listed in the Appendix. The majority of the uses in Appendix 1 also
anticipate the consumption of food and drink on the premises or, at least, the facility
to do so.
[13][18] Nor am I persuaded, however, that the applicants’ operations constitute ‘food stuff
manufacturing’ which would bring them within the definition of ‘light industry’.
The type of food preparation carried out on the premises (cooking pasta and
quiches, and preparing a sea food mix from prepared ingredients etc.) cannot
1 And, see Cherrabun Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [1985] QPLR 205, per Quirk DCJ at 208
2 Kingston Road Investments Pty Ltd v Logan City Council [1999] QPELR 260, at 262 per Skoien SJDC
3 CTS Strathpine Pty Ltd v Pine Rivers Shire Council at paras [32], and [33]; and, see Westfield Management
Ltd v Pine Rivers Shire Council [2004] QPELR 337; and Woolworths Ltd v Caboolture Shire Council
[2004] QPELR 550
-- 5 of 6 --
6
sensibly be characterised as ‘manufacturing’. 4 What the applicants do here is more
akin to ‘… merely representing the same material but in a different size or shape
…’ 5 . It is also, again, typical of the activity to be expected in many of the
businesses listed in Appendix 1.
[13][19] I was not taken to any other definition within the scheme which might conceivably
provide a ‘best fit’ for the applicants’ operation 6 . If it is assumed there is none
which might sensibly apply, the use appears to be an innominate one.
4 See, eg, ACR Trading Pty Ltd v Fat-Sel Pty Ltd (1987) 11 NSWLR 67 (CA) per Kirby P at 78; and, Clarke
v Biddle [1997] QPELR 67 at 70 per Quirk DCJ.
5 ACR Trading Pty Ltd v Fat-Sel Pty Ltd (supra) at 78
6 An exercise approved in Noosa Shire Council v Staley [2002] QPELR 441 at [14]
-- 6 of 6 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QPEC/2007/010