Australia: Planning and Environment Court awards costs against a commercial competitor

HG Planning and Development Alert: 28 August 2014
Last Updated: 1 September 2014
Article by David Nicholls and Gemma Chadwick

The Planning and Environment Court's expanded costs power was introduced in November 2012. Since that time, we have released three alerts ( 22 November 2012, 16 September 2013, and 24 January 2014) examining decisions made under the costs provision in section 457 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA).

In the latest decision on costs, YFG Shopping Centres Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council & Ors (No 2) [2014] QPEC 43, the Planning and Environment Court awarded costs to a developer who successfully defended an appeal instituted by a commercial competitor.

In this alert, Partner David Nicholls and Senior Associate Gemma Chadwick outline important aspects of the YFG decision.

Key Points

  1. The broad costs discretion enables the Planning and Environment Court to make robust and practical decisions about costs, weighing up concepts such as the "relative success of the parties" as well as their "commercial interests".
  2. The concept of "relative success of the parties" does not equate to the general rule in civil litigation that "costs follow the event", however, in proceedings involving commercial competitors it is likely to be a significant factor weighing in the Court's ultimate discretion to awards costs.
  3. It will be difficult for commercial competitors to draw parallels between their interest in a proceeding (even where involving legitimate interests rather than purely economic ones) and members of a community who raise genuine concerns about negative impacts on amenity. As a consequence, commercial competitors and submitters are likely to be treated differently from a costs perspective;
  4. Even when a party succeeds in establishing conflict with the scheme, this will not automatically militate against a costs order. The degree of success will be viewed in the context of sufficient grounds and, if there is evidence of a clear need, that will be particularly relevant.


The Brisbane City Council had issued a Negotiated Decision Notice to the developer, Fabcot, for a mixed use development, incorporating a significant Woolworths supermarket with associated specialty shops, a Masters hardware store and medium density residential development in Everton Park.

Council's approval was challenged in the Planning and Environment Court by YFG, the owner of two significant shopping centres in the general vicinity of the land. YFG, the only party to the appeal who opposed the proposed development, raised issues encompassing:

  • conflict with Council's planning scheme, City Plan 2000;
  • out of centre development;
  • urban design and visual amenity;
  • stormwater flooding and drainage;
  • traffic; and
  • a lack of sufficient grounds to justify approval despite the conflict and, in particular, a lack of need for the proposed Masters development.

The Planning and Environment Court delivered a judgment in October 2013, disposing of YFG's appeal.1 Fabcot then applied to the Court for an order that YFG pay its costs of and incidental to the appeal, to be assessed on the standard basis. In the alternative, Fabcot sought its costs associated with the issues in dispute concerning out of centre development, urban design and visual amenity, stormwater flooding and drainage, traffic and sufficient grounds.

YFG cross applied, seeking an order that Fabcot pay its cost of an incidental to the appeal or, in the alternative, limited costs associated with disputed traffic issues. YFG also sought its costs "thrown away" in respect of a number of court appearances subsequent to the handing down of the substantive judgment.

The philosophy of costs

The Court made some interesting observations on the notion of "the relative success of the parties" as distinct from the idea of "costs following the event". The general rule in civil proceedings, found in rule 681 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, is that costs of a proceeding, including an application in a proceeding, are in the discretion of the court but follow the event, unless the court orders otherwise. That general rule does not apply in the Planning and Environment Court, where the discretion is an open one, with the Court empowered to have regard to a range of matters including "the relative success of the parties" and "the commercial interests of the parties".

In discussing the general philosophy of costs in the Planning and Environment Court, His Honour Judge Jones referred to comments in Cox & Ors v Brisbane City Council & Anor (No 2) [2014] QPELR 92, where Rackemann DCJ had noted that the discretion in the Planning and Environment Court was not to be approached on the presumption that costs follow the event, or that there is a qualified protection against an adverse costs order, as was previously the case in SPA. Instead, the discretion was an open one.2 Jones DCJ agreed with those observations, noting that there was no presumption that costs follow the event or notion that the relative success of the parties should be determinative of costs issues. However Jones DCJ made it plain that the success of the parties was a relevant consideration. In fact, Jones DCJ considered it to be "a significant consideration" in light of "litigation of the type involved here" (which, when considered against the balance of his Honour's reasons, seems to be a reference to litigation between commercial competitors).

The judge noted:

"On any objective view of it, Fabcot had successfully defended itself against YFG's appeal. It is true that Fabcot may have lost some of the battles along the way but that does not detract from the overall success of Fabcot in my view, at least not to the extent of denying it any favourable costs orders."

Commercial interests

His Honour then went on to deal with submissions about the commercial interests of the parties. The judge noted:

  1. It was clear, even on YFG's case, that it had a commercial interest in the outcome of the proceeding, even if (as was suggested in YFG's submissions) that interest was to ensure a more efficient road network to facilitate access to facilities and services offered at YFG's shopping centres.
  2. Section 457(2)(b) of SPA does not require that there be an identifiable untoward commercial motive, rather what is relevant (if the court considers it so) is the fact that a party has a commercial interest in the outcome of the proceeding.
  3. A number of the issues raised by YFG were legitimate issues supported by appropriate expert evidence.

Expanding on the final point, Jones DCJ considered the case of Cox could be distinguished, even though two of the parties to that proceeding had some commercial interest in the proceeding. The relevant factor was that, in Cox, the issues centred on the character and amenity of the area which involved matters of judgment where "reasonable minds can differ". His Honour concluded:

"[21]... This was not such a case. While I accept that YFG might have had legitimate interests, other than purely economic ones, in seeing the subject site appropriately developed it was, at the end of the day, a significant commercial entity with commercial interests in the general area that made a commercial decision to attempt to prevent the Masters development proceeding. Unlike the situation in Cox, this was not a case involving a member or members of a community having genuine concerns about negative impacts on amenity.
...[I]t is my firm view that the only inference reasonably open was that YFG instituted its appeal intending, at least in part, to protect its undisclosed commercial interests. I was not taken to any material to indicate that YFG was acting in the public interest. In regard to s 457(2)(b) of the SPA there was no material which would indicate that YFG's motive was to merely delay the proposed development. Its obvious intention was to stop the proposed Masters development which, I suppose, is the ultimate form of delay. Given YFG's approach to the litigation I am unable to draw any other conclusion. In this context I consider the distinction between a "commercial competitor" and a "submitter with a commercial interest in the locality" to be, in the circumstances of these proceedings, one of little, if any, significance."

YFG argued that it was entitled to its costs, or at the least Fabcot should be denied a favourable costs order, because:

  • it successfully established there was conflict with the planning scheme, despite Fabcot's and Council's denial that there was any conflict; and
  • it achieved, through the appeal, a number of improvements that were of public benefit including a better hydraulic outcome and a significantly improved design outcome of Everton Avenue (the proposed road adjoining the residential component of the development).

The judge concluded that these assertions had to be seen in context. In particular, while YFG established conflict with the scheme, it was "abundantly clear, when seen in the light of all the evidence"3 that there was sufficient need to justify the approval despite the conflict. In that context, it was significant that the economic evidence of the experts called by Council and Fabcot was not seriously challenged by YFG's expert. In addition, the judge categorised the hydraulic issue as a "side issue"4 and considered that urban design and visual amenity issues were "of little consequence in the overall context of the appeal."5 Finally, it weighed against YFG that it maintained a traffic issue when it was clear on the evidence it could be dealt with through conditions and was not sustainable as a reason for refusal.

The costs orders

Against that background, the judge considered that it may have been open to require YFG to pay all of Fabcot's costs associated with the appeal. In balancing the moderate success of YFG on the "conflict" issue, the judge ultimately concluded that YFG should pay two thirds of Fabcot's costs of the appeal.

YFG failed to establish a basis to support an order for its costs in the appeal. The judge noted that the discount applied to the orders made in favour of Fabcot recognised any success YFG had. YFG had some limited success in respect of its application for "costs thrown away", with the judge ultimately ordering that it incurred costs on two days (following delivery of judgment in the substantive appeal) due to Fabcot's failure to provide material, including plans to the parties.


The broad costs discretion enables the Planning and Environment Court to make robust and practical decisions about costs, weighing up concepts such as the "relative success of the parties" as well as their "commercial interests".


1YFG Shopping Centres Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council & Ors [2013] QPEC 59

2Cox at [2]

3YFG, at [27]

4YFG, at [27]

5YFG, at [27]

© HopgoodGanim Lawyers

Award-winning law firm HopgoodGanim offers commercially-focused advice, coupled with reliable and responsive service, to clients throughout Australia and across international borders.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

David Nicholls
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.