In the media
Commonwealth
PCA: Stimulus package welcome but challenges still
ahead
The Federal Government's economic stimulus package
will provide welcome support for Australian businesses and
households, but there are still significant challenges ahead as
governments manage the public health response to the coronavirus
outbreak (12 March 2020).
More...
Stimulus measures will support home building
HIA welcomes the Australian Government stimulus package,
particularly the support provided for apprentices. The construction
industry employs over 1.1 million people, with residential building
work generating over $105 billion for the Australian economy in
2018 and accounting for 5.8 per cent of expenditure in the
Australian economy (12 March 2020).
More...
Low rates, stimulus will cushion coronavirus hit:
RBA
An expected recovery in residential construction, historic
low interest rates and big infrastructure spending could support
the economic fall-out from the impact of the Coronavirus outbreak,
the Reserve Bank has said (11 March 2020).
More...
Eastern seaboard vacancy rate to remain as supply
falls
Australia has experienced solid occupier demand for
industrial space in recent years, particularly across the eastern
seaboard with the average vacancy rate sitting around 3.8 per cent
(10 March 2020).
More...
Construction industry could lead recovery
The construction industry could pave the way for an
economic recovery following the shock impacts of COVID-19 with
support leading to a knock-on effect to other industries (10 March
2020).
More...
Development cycle returning to undersupply: CBRE
Strong price growth has returned to Sydney and Melbourne
and is expected to spread to more affordable Brisbane, according to
CBRE research (04 March 2020).
More...
Victoria
Lucent plans $62m Brunswick East project
A $62 million residential development in Brunswick East by
Melbourne-based developer Lucent will soon kick off construction.
Lucent managing director Panos Miltiadou says the
ClarkeHopkinsClarke-designed project, known as the Stewart
Collective, which spans the last infill pocket in the Brunswick
East location (11 March 2020).
More...
Central Pier next steps
Permanent boarding will be installed around Central Pier
in Docklands to secure the site which was closed after engineers
assessed the 100-year old structure as no longer safe for public
access. Development Victoria has also begun discussions with
Heritage Victoria and other key stakeholders around the planning
process involved in any redevelopment of the structure (11 March
2020).
More...
Gurner wins approval for Collingwood hotel
Tim Gurner has secured planning approval for a boutique
hotel at his Johnston Street site in Collingwood, a year after
ditching plans for a residential scheme. Under the partnership
Gurner will retain ownership of the hotel and retail components as
part of a longer-term buy-and-hold strategy (09 March 2020).
More...
New chapter for Federation Square
The City of Melbourne wants to invest $22 million to make
Federation Square a premier civic space. The funding is contingent
on Council being given management responsibilities for the site.
Under the arrangement, City of Melbourne would manage the site,
including tenancies, maintenance and activation (07 March 2020).
More...
Protecting Victoria's marine and coastal
environments
The new Marine and Coastal Policy guides the
planning and management of marine and coastal environments so that
ecosystems, communities, industries and built assets are as
resilient as they can be in the face of future challenges such as
natural hazards, climate change and population growth (06 March
2020).
More...
NSW
Sydney's top 15 major development projects
Sydney is set to add a spate of new development to its
iconic skyline over the coming years, boosted by a now-$55 billion
infrastructure and transport pipeline (12 March 2020).
More...
Planning changes for bushfire-affected communities
Small businesses in bushfire-affected communities will be
able to operate from portable offices without council approval,
under the latest bushfire recovery initiative from the NSW
Government (05 March 2020).
More...
Plans for high towers dwarfing Sydney's Central
station spark concerns
A high rise for tech giant Atlassian will be among the
first buildings to be constructed at the southern end of the CBD as
part of a massive redevelopment (05 March 2020).
More...
Queensland
PCA: Valuer-general releases 2020 property market
movement report
The Queensland Valuer-General has released the 2020
Property Market Movement Report shows an undersupply of industrial
land in Brisbane with good access to major road networks in the
prime transport and logistics market has been noted in the report.
The report has found that the Brisbane commercial market has
remained static over the last year (12 March 2020).
More...
Brisbane's top 10 major development projects
With $20 billion worth of development projects in its
pipeline, Brisbane is fast becoming a city of mega projects.
Sizeable residential masterplans and commercial precincts have
added to the city's burgeoning development pipeline, with
strong population growth continuing to unlock development
opportunities (06 March 2020).
More...
Developer lodges plans for $200m Pelican Waters
precinct
The Henzell family has lodged a development application
for 226 residences at Pelican Waters to be developed over four
stages on the Sunshine Coast (05 March 2020).
More...
REIQ: Save time, lodge online
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) is increasing and
enhancing its online services to the real estate industry as part
of the Queensland Government's commitment to reducing red tape
and providing simpler, faster processes for the lodgement of
documents (04 March 2020). More...
Brisbane land values remain steady
2020 land valuations show Brisbane median land values have
increased by around $5,000 (04 March 2020).
More...
Woolworths plans $184m distribution centre in
Brisbane
Supermarket giant Woolworths has lodged a development
application for a new 42,000sq m distribution centre in Brisbane
(02 March 2020).
More...
In practice and courts
Commonwealth
Enhancements to unfair contract term (UCT)
protections
The Treasury is
seeking feedback on a range of policy options to address the
issues identified by the UCT Review. It also seeks views on whether
any enhanced UCT protections for small business contracts should
also be extended to consumer and insurance contracts to ensure
consistency in the operation of the protections.
API: Valuation protocol: inspection requirements when
undertaking valuations of real property
This Valuation Protocol relates to inspection requirements
for API Valuer Members (Valuers) when undertaking valuations of
real property assets for all purposes excluding statutory
valuations. It replaces the previous Valuation Protocol, of the
same name, that was published on 31 July 2019 (28 February 2020).
More...
API: PropertyPRO supporting memorandum release date 5
April 2020
The effective date for the 'new' PropertyPRO
Supporting Memorandum, including full adoption of the report
templates, is 5 April 2020. The current PropertyPRO Residential
Valuation and Security Assessment Supporting Memorandum remains in
effect.?A PDF version of the current version is
available here.
More...
Governance Institute
Is your business continuity plan ready for coronavirus?
Be alert, not alarmed, and respond in a measured way. That's
the advice from the experts as coronavirus (COVID-19) cases
continue to rise in Australia. Organisations are advised to review
their pandemic and business continuity policies to ensure these are
fit for purpose (March 2020).
More...
Review of the Lands Acquisition Act 1989: Discussion
paper
Details of how to make a submission are available on the
Department of Finance's
website. Submissions close on 17 April 2020.
Announcements, Draft Policies and Plans released 2019
Annual statutory land valuations 2020
The Valuer-General issued approximately 825,000 new land
valuations to landowners across Queensland on 4 March 2020. The
land valuations assist in the determination of council rates, state
land tax, and rentals for leasehold land.
Landowners who believe their valuation was incorrect and can
provide supporting information should
lodge their objection online or at the address shown at the top
of their valuation notice by 5 May 2020.
The latest valuation data is available using the
Find your annual valuation.
REIQ: Property management
Smoke alarm maintenance saves lives 11 March 2020
Navigating new management with an existing tenancy agreement 11
March 2020
Fast facts: dishonoured rental payments 10 March 2020
Cases
AE Brighton Holdings Pty Ltd v UDP Holdings Pty
Ltd [2020] VSCA 43
APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS - real risk that costs
order would not be satisfied - impecuniosity arising out of conduct
complained of in related proceedings - appeal raising threshold
question of law - application refused
The application for leave to appeal is made with respect to orders
made in the Trial Division by Ginnane J on 15 October 2019 in which
his Honour: (a) dismissed a summons issued by AEB seeking the
removal of caveats lodged by UDP on the titles to four separate
parcels of land ('the properties')
Gebrehiwot v McCutcheon [2020] VSC
109
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND APPEALS - appeal from Magistrates'
Court pursuant to s 272(1) of Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) -
decision of Fines Victoria to cancel enforcement of an infringement
notice following review - written notice of cancellation served on
Victoria police - decision of Victoria Police to commence
proceedings - whether proceedings commenced within applicable time
limit under ss 38 and 39 of the Fines Reform Act 2014 (Vic) -
appellant's construction gives no practical effect to s 39 -
proceeding commenced within time - appeal dismissed - R v
A2 [2019] HCA 35; (2019) 93 ALJR 1106; Project Blue Sky
Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355
applied.
Annat v Commissioner of State Revenue
[2020] VSC 108
TAXATION - Land Tax - exemption for primary production -
whether Land used primarily for the business of primary production
- whether a beneficiary of the appellant was normally engaged in a
substantially full-time capacity in the business of primary
production - whether part of the Land should be regarded as a
separate parcel - evidence not reliable - appellant has not
discharged onus of proof - assessments confirmed - Abbott v
Commissioner of Land Tax [1985] VicRp 15; [1985] VR 164
applied - Sections 64, 67 and 70(2) Land Tax Act 2005 (Vic)
Tasman Logistics Services Pty Ltd v Seaco Global Aust Pty
Ltd & Ors [2020] VSC
100
PERSONAL PROPERTY - disposal of uncollected goods -
whether pt 4.2 of the Australian Consumer Law and Fair Trading Act
2012 (Vic) applies - effect of contract between provider and
receiver of goods - Jurisdiction of Courts and VCAT to make orders
for the disposal of goods - Jurisdictional facts - disposition of
proceeds of sale - disposal of uncollected goods to landfill -
priority as between receiver of goods and owner - Australian
Consumer Law and Fair Trading Act 2012 (Vic) ss 3, 54, 56, 57, 59,
68, 70, 71, 72, 73 and 75; Goods Act 1958 (Vic) s 27; Corporations
Act 2001 (Cth) s 568D(1); Personal Property Securities Act 2009
(Cth) ss 8, 10, 73.
Kestenberg v Kestenberg [2020] VSC
84
TRUSTS - family based discretionary trusts - Trustee
company controlled by parents - various claims by beneficiary
against parents for exclusionary conduct and breach of
trustees' duties - allegation of trustees' wrongful payment
of plaintiff's distribution entitlements over to parents -
serious dispute whether plaintiff had gifted her beneficiary
entitlements to parents - quantum of distributions not in dispute -
Plaintiff's application for particular discovery of trust
financial statements and source documents - separation between
right to information under trust law and discovery of information
on relevant question in proceeding - application as sought refused
- limited particular discovery ordered for trustees' documents
showing accounting for effectuation of alleged gifts
WOTCH v VicForests (No 2) [2020] VSC
99
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - interlocutory injunction -
whether serious question to be tried — whether balance of
convenience favours granting injunction - timber harvesting of
State forests — whether bushfires affect application of Code
of Practice - threatened species of greater glider, powerful owl,
sooty owl, smoky mouse and alpine tree frog - conservation, Forests
and Lands Act 1987 (Vic) - Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Vic)
- Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004 (Vic) - Environment
East Gippsland Inc v VicForests [2009] VSC 386 -
Environment East Gippsland Inc v VicForests [2010] VSC
335; (2010) 30 VR 1 - MyEnvironment v VicForests [2012]
VSC 91 - Friends of the Leadbeater's Possum v
VicForests (2018) 231 LGERA 75
Rizzo v Head, Transport for Victoria [2020]
VSC 89
VALUATION AND COMPENSATION - amendment to Hume Planning
Scheme - imposition of Public Acquisition Overlay for Outer
Metropolitan Ring/E6 Transport Corridor - referral of disputed
claim for compensation for loss on sale under Pt 5, Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (Vic) - claim made before completion of
contract for sale of land - proceeding held to have no real
prospect of success as presently framed - whether applicants can
amend notice of claim - whether applicants can amend referral
notice - Court's jurisdiction limited to determining
'disputed claim' under Land Acquisition and Compensation
Act 1986 (Vic) - application for leave to amend notice of claim and
referral notice refused - Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic)
ss 98(1), 99(b), 105, 106(1) - Land Acquisition and Compensation
Act 1986 (Vic), ss 37, 80, 89 - Plunkett v Roads
Corporation [2019] VSC 39
Chan v Chan [2020] VSCA
40
LAND - recovery of possession - whether summary procedure
for recovery of land under Order 53 County Court Civil Procedure
Rules 2018 available or appropriate - dispute between sister and
brother about ownership of land - whether brother a tenant at will
or a licensee - significant issues of fact in dispute - proprietary
estoppel - whether sister held property on constructive trust for
brother - leave to appeal granted - appeal allowed
Redland City Council v King of Gifts (Qld) Pty Ltd and HTC
Consulting Pty Ltd & Anor [2020] QCA
41
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - COURTS AND TRIBUNALS WITHIN
ENVIRONMENT JURISDICTION - QUEENSLAND - PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
COURT AND ITS PREDECESSORS - RIGHT AND AVAILABILITY OF APPEAL -
where the applicant seeks leave to appeal from a decision of the
Planning and Environment Court pursuant to s 63 of the Planning and
Environment Court Act 2016 (Qld) - where the primary judge ordered
that the appeal be adjourned in November 2017, giving reasons that
she intended to allow the appeal and that the purpose of the
adjournment was to allow for the "formulation of reasonable
and relevant conditions" for approval of the development -
where final orders on the appeal were made in June 2018 - where the
applicant seeks leave to appeal from the final orders made on June
2018 - whether the appeal to the Court of Appeal was made out of
time - whether leave to appeal should be granted
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING - PLANNING
SCHEMES AND INSTRUMENTS - QUEENSLAND - where the primary judge
granted an appeal pursuant to s 461(1) of the Sustainable Planning
Act 2009 (Qld) (SPA) against the local government's refusal of
a development application for a material change of use to develop
land for a service station, drive through restaurant and an on-site
effluent disposal irrigation area - where the development
application was impact assessable such that it was required to be
assessed against all relevant provisions of the applicable planning
scheme - where the planning scheme is divided into various zones,
including the Open Space Zone and the Environmental Protection Zone
(EP Zone) - where the planning scheme also has a number of overlays
- where the entirety of the site is contained within the Kinross
Road Structure Plan (KRSP) Overlay Code - where the built form of
the proposed development is located within the EP Zone and Bushland
Living Precinct 6 of the KRSP Overlay Code - where the effluent
treatment area of the proposed development is located within the
Open Space Zone and Greenspace Precinct 7 of the KRSP Overlay Code
- where the primary judge found that the proposed development
complied with relevant ecological provisions of the EP Zone Code
and the KRSP Code - whether the primary judge misconstrued specific
outcome S1.1 of the EP Zone Code - whether the primary judge erred
in concluding that the proposed development complied with overall
outcomes 4.6.7(2)(a)(i)c. and e. of the EP Zone Code - whether the
primary judge erred in concluding that the proposed development
complied with overall outcome 5.15.8(f) and specific outcome
1.7(2)(b) of the KRSP Overlay Code - whether the primary judge
erroneously took into account an irrelevant consideration by having
regard to the maintenance and protection of ecological values of
Hilliards Creek, which was located in the Northern Portion of the
site
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING - PLANNING
SCHEMES AND INSTRUMENTS - QUEENSLAND - where the first
respondents' economic expert gave evidence before the primary
judge that any economic need for the proposed development could be
met by a "service station with a smaller convenience store,
fewer fuel spots, without the car wash and possibly without the
drive through restaurant" - where the primary judge rejected
that evidence as irrelevant because it was a "hypothetical
alternative" - where the primary judge then made a factual
finding that there was a need for the proposed development -
whether the primary judge took an erroneous approach in assessing
the need for the development as a question of fact, thereby
amounting to an error of law
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING - PLANNING
SCHEMES AND INSTRUMENTS - QUEENSLAND - where the primary judge held
that while the proposed development conflicted with the planning
scheme in some respects, there was otherwise a need for the
proposed development that was a sufficient ground to justify
approval of the development pursuant to s 326(1)(b) of the SPA -
whether the primary judge erred in assessing the need for the
proposed developments that would otherwise justify the approval of
the development - whether the primary judge correctly applied s
326(1)(b) of the SPA to assess whether the need for the development
was a sufficient ground to approve the development in the public
interest, despite its conflicts with the planning scheme
Logan City Council v Brookes [2020]
QDC 24
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING - ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING -
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT PROSECUTIONS - GENERALLY - where the
respondent, without a permit, moved seven shipping containers onto
his property - where the appellant commenced proceedings by way of
seven complaints charging the respondent with carrying on
assessable development without a permit contrary to s 578 of the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009 - where the complaints were
particularised as carrying on "building work" as defined
in s 10 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 - where the learned
magistrate found that each shipping container was not a "fixed
structure" and as such did not amount to carrying on building
work - whether the learned magistrate erred in finding that the
movement of the shipping containers was not "building
work"
EVIDENCE - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - EVIDENCE LAW - RULINGS AND FINDINGS
- where the learned magistrate admitted into evidence an agreed
statement of facts containing purported admissions pursuant to s
148A of the Justices Act 1886 - where the respondent was
self-represented at trial - where the respondent argues on appeal
that he did not consent to the agreed statement of facts - where
the agreed statement of facts was tendered by the appellant without
objection from the respondent - where the respondent later stated
in the trial that some facts were agreed but others were not -
whether the respondent should be allowed to resile from the agreed
statement of facts
MAGISTRATES - APPEAL AND REVIEW - QUEENSLAND - APPEAL - PROCEDURE -
where the appellant applied for leave to adduce new evidence -
where the appellant seeks to adduce evidence of correspondence
between the parties in relation to the agreed statement of facts
tendered at trial so as to answer the respondent's argument on
appeal - the test in Pavlovic v Commissioner of Police
[2007] 1 Qd R 344 - whether the appellant should be granted leave
to adduce new evidence
Justices Act 1886 Qld s 148A, s 222, s 223; Sustainable Planning
Act 2009 Qld s 7, s 10, s 578
Hemmant Property Group Pty Ltd v Brisbane City
Council [2020] QPEC
6
In the even that Hemmant Properties were to convince the
Court that the appeal ought be allowed - subject to a condition
requiring it to, at its expense - upgrade the relevant section of
Burnby Road - there would be in my opinion, no reason why this
Court could not allow the appeal subject to such a condition, and
that would include, of course, requiring it to get the consent of
the council to carry out the necessary roadworks
Cases to 09 March 2020
Body Corporate for Torwood Hill Residential Retreat v
Fittell [2020] QSC
32
REAL PROPERTY - EASEMENTS - EASEMENTS GENERALLY - CREATION
- BY EXPRESS AGREEMENT OR UNDER STATUTE - STATUTORY EASEMENTS -
where applicant applies for orders allowing its contractors access
to the respondent's land to rectify a retaining wall sitting on
the common boundary between the two properties - where orders made
allowing access - where costs submissions sought - where both
parties seek their costs - where applicant must show special
circumstances to secure such an order - where respondent had
legitimate interests to defend - where the respondent contributed
to the protraction of the proceedings - whether the respondent
should bear some of the costs burden
Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997, s 94 Property Law
Act 1974 Qld s 180
Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module)
Regulation 1997 Qld r 159
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 Qld r 681
YFG Shopping Centres Pty Ltd as Tte & Anor v
Valuer-General; Shayher Alliance Pty Ltd as Tte v Valuer-General;
Leda Commercial Properties Pty Ltd as Tte v Valuer-General; Lipoma
Pty Ltd as Tte v Valuer-General; RG Property Three Pty Ltd as Tte v
Valuer-General [2020] QLC
10
REAL PROPERTY - VALUATION OF LAND - OBJECTIONS AND APPEALS
- QUEENSLAND - GENERALLY - where the Valuer-General valued a number
of shopping centres - whether the Valuer-General's valuations
were excessive - whether the valuations were so obviously excessive
that an error could be inferred
REAL PROPERTY - VALUATION OF LAND - OBJECTIONS AND APPEALS -
QUEENSLAND - EVIDENCE - where both parties engaged expert valuers
to give evidence - where the expert valuers produced a joint expert
report (JER) - where the expert valuers gave concurrent evidence -
where the experts considered the size of the sites, the site
catchments and the position of the centres in the retail hierarchy
to determine site value - Land Valuation Act 2010 (Qld) s 19(1) -
whether the expert valuers could have regard to the shopping
centres' trading performance in their valuations
REAL PROPERTY - VALUATION OF LAND - METHODS OF VALUATION -
COMPARABLE SALES - EVIDENCE OF COMPARABLE SALES - where some of the
comparable sites had existing agreements for lease - where the
expert valuers differed on how to treat the agreements for lease -
where some of the sales evidence that was included in the joint
expert report was then impugned in cross-examination by one of the
expert valuers
Land Valuation Act 2010 Qld s 19(1)
MRV Metals Pty Ltd v Chief Executive, Department of
Environment and Science [2020] QLC
9
STATUTES - ACTS OF PARLIAMENT - INTERPRETATION - GENERAL
APPROACHES TO INTERPRETATION - whether the pre-Amended
Environmental Protection Act 1994 applies - whether, if the
pre-Amended Act does not apply, the Land Court has jurisdiction to
hear the appeal - where the Land Court does have jurisdiction
PROCEDURE - CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS -
SEPARATE DECISION OR DETERMINATION OF QUESTIONS - where the Court
was asked to determine preliminary questions for the appeal - where
the parties could not agree on the formulation of some preliminary
questions - whether there was utility in answering some questions -
whether there was an adequate factual foundation to answer some
questions - where the Court answered some questions and declined to
answer one
STATUTES - ACTS OF PARLIAMENT - INTERPRETATION - GENERAL APPROACHES
TO INTERPRETATION - where the pre-Amended Environmental Protection
Act 1994 provides for financial assurances for the cost of taking
action because of environmental harm caused by mining activities
and imposes a statutory cap on the amount of the financial
assurance - where the parties did not agree on the interpretation
and application of the cap where there is pre-existing
environmental harm - whether the definition of environmental harm
in s 14(2) Environmental Protection Act 1994 sets the scope of the
financial assurance - where the Court found the cap limited the
financial assurance to the cost of taking action to rehabilitate or
restore and protect the environment because of any further
environmental harm caused by the activity - where the Court found
that action may, as a matter of practical necessity, also address
pre-existing environmental harm, a matter that could only be
determined after hearing evidence
Acts Interpretation Act 1954 Qld s 4, s 20(2)(b), s 20(2)(c), s
20(3)
Environmental Protection Act (as in force 29 March 2019) 1994 Qld s
9, s 14, s 18, s 107, s 110, s 287, s 288, s 290, s 292, s 295(4),
s 298, s 426, s 519, s 521, s 524, sch 2, sch 4
Environmental Protection Act 1994 Qld s 112, s 126D, s 296, s 297,
s 300, s 753(2), s 757, s 760, s 761, Ch 5, pt 14
Land Court Act 2000 Qld s 5, s 7(b), s 33(1)(b); Land Court Rules
2000 Qld r 19(2)(a)
Legislation
Queensland
Subordinate Legislation as made
No 28
Regional Planning Interests (North Queensland Strategic
Environmental Area) Amendment Regulation 2020 06 March
2020
No 29
Rural and Regional Adjustment (Extension of Funding and New Scheme
for 2019-2020 Extraordinary Bushfires Disaster) Amendment
Regulation 2020 13 March 2020
This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.