BCC just bent us over. Need a solicitor.

[perthguy]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but this is the level of research you should of done BEFORE you entered this debacle. Good Luck with it either way Tim.

To be fair to Tim, council gave a pretty firm response that the block could be subdivided. I think what we can all learn out of this is that even if council says yes, until you have an approval in writing, there are no guarantees.

 

[sanj]

Actually I think the lesson is to bring the rigjt professionals in early. Would tim have been able to make an informed decision on his 3 options without darryls assistance?

 

[Perp]

To be fair to Tim, council gave a pretty firm response that the block could be subdivided. I think what we can all learn out of this is that even if council says yes, until you have an approval in writing, there are no guarantees.

Even if it's in writing, it may not have helped. The courts are very reluctant to hold public authorities responsible for the economic consequences of their decisions, because to do so may compromise their ability to make - and change - decisions in the public interest, and also threatens the separation of powers between executive and judiciary.

There's a quite famous precedential case - San Sebastian Pty Ltd v The Minister (1986) 162 CLR 340 - where the Sydney City Council published a plan, adopted it, rezoned land, and even encouraged developers to purchase land that was re-zoned for high-rise development, then the developers lost a lot of money when the Council decided to abandon the plan a few years later after discovering it wasn't actually feasible to redevelop as they'd proposed. The developers initially won in NSW, but lost on appeal to the High Court.

A reasonable plain language summary of the judgment can be found here: http://lawstudies.wikidot.com/sansebastianvminister-2010

Full text, if you're so inclined : http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/1986/68.html

I would note that it may have gone differently if the advice was specific to a particular lot, and if the receiver of advice/information told the Council that they would be relying on the answer to make decisions that had significant economic consequences.

If you said that, though, the consequent written advice would probably have a solid disclaimer on it, in any case.

So it's going to be extremely unusual for a developer to ever have any comeback regarding losses consequent upon relying on advice from public authorities, even when it's in writing.

 

[perthguy]

Even if it's in writing, it may not have helped.
...
If you said that, though, the consequent written advice would probably have a solid disclaimer on it, in any case.

So it's going to be extremely unusual for a developer to ever have any comeback regarding losses consequent upon relying on advice from public authorities, even when it's in writing.

Approval in writing is a development approval or subdivision approval and is legally binding. I was not talking about written advice, I was talking about a formal council approval.

 

[Perp]

Approval in writing is a development approval or subdivision approval and is legally binding. I was not talking about written advice, I was talking about a formal council approval.

Apologies; I wasn't intending to suggest you were mistaken. I was responding to Tim86's situation. i.e. Even if Tim had it in writing that it was subdividable...

 

[perthguy]

Apologies; I wasn't intending to suggest you were mistaken. I was responding to Tim86's situation. i.e. Even if Tim had it in writing that it was subdividable...

I agree with you. I would never rely on written advice from a council. The only thing you can rely on is an approval in writing: development approval or subdivision approval. Until you get that formal approval in writing, it's always uncertain.

 

[Perp]

Until you get that formal approval in writing, it's always uncertain.

Absolutely!