I AM THE LAW
Browse › Case law › Queensland

Fairview Farming Co Pty Ltd v Cairns City Council [1997] QSC 39

Case law · Queensland · 1997
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CAIRNS DISTRICT REGISTRY [Fairview Farming Co P IL v. Cairns City Council] BETWEEN: AND: FAIRVIEW FARMING CO PTY LTD (ACN 009 656 660) CAIRNS CITY COUNCIL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - BYRNE J. Judgment delivered: 14/0311997 No. 117 of 1996 Plaintiff Defendant CATCHWORDS: LOCAL GOVERNMENT - restitution - payment under mistake of law - condition of subdivisional approval - whether jurisdiction to decide claim. Counsel: Mr D.B. Fraser Q.C. for the plaintiff (respondent) Ms M.A. Wilson Q.c., with her Mr A.R. Philp for the defendant (applicant) Solicitors Dale Treanor for the plaintiff (respondent) McDonnells for the defendant (applicant) Hearing Date: 8 January 1997 . " for the purpose of research and pri:;: .. This judgment is to be copiedused for republication in any other Wo. only It is not to be resoid or . . n I • permls slO • .. ', .'. 1. -- 1 of 2 -- IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OUEENSLAND CAIRNS DISTRICT REGISTRY [Fairview Farming Co P/L v. Cairns City Council] BETWEEN: AND: FAIRVIEW FARMING CO PTY LTD (ACN 009 656 660) CAIRNS CITY COUNCIL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT - BYRNE J. Judgment delivered: 14/03/1997 No. 117 of 1996 Plaintiff Defendant As in Kamerunga Villa Pty Ltd v . Cairns City Council, No. 89 of 1995 Cairns Registry, in which judgment is being delivered today, the plaintiff seeks to recover moneys said to have been overpaid under mistake of law pursuant to a condition attaching to a sub divisional approval. To the extent that this case may involve consideration of the Local Government (Planning and Environment) Act 1990, it is common ground that that Act contains provisions which are not materially dissimilar in effect from those in the legislation considered in Kamerunga. In substance, the material facts and other considerations are also similar. Accordingly, for the reasons given in Kamerunga, this application to dismiss the action on the footing that the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain it is dismissed. -- 2 of 2 --