Who determines the merits of Queensland planning - planners or lawyers?

A lawyer's perspective

In response to an article published in the Queensland Planner, HopgoodGanim partner David Nicholls, voices his opinion in a recently published article in the Planning Institute of Australia journal.

In his article in Volume 48, Issue 4 of Queensland Planner, Dr Phil Day seeks to rekindle the campaign he commenced 30 years ago with an article in Queensland Planning Papers (No. 9, April 1979) entitled “The Appeals System – Enriching the Lawyers but stifling Planning”.  

I write this article in the interests of providing members of the Institute with an alternative perspective.  I expect to be accused of self-interest.  I have no defence to such accusations because I am a practising planning lawyer.  I spend my working life giving advice to people about how to structure development applications in order to give them the best prospects of approval, and so as to avoid the pitfalls of our complex planning and development system.  I didn’t create that system.  Indeed, it wasn’t a system designed by practising planning lawyers.  Readers will simply have to judge for themselves whether there is any merit in what I have to say about the respective roles of planners and lawyers.  Time and space do not permit me to write a line by line rejoinder although the article contains a multiplicity of related points that warrant analysis and discussion.  Instead I will have to content myself with responding to a few key passages which for convenience, I will set out again in this article.

Click on the PDF link to download a full copy of this paper.