Harwood Andrews is delighted to have been identified by clients and peers for expertise and abilities in two areas for Victoria in the 2024 Doyles Guide.

Harwood Andrews is delighted to have been identified by clients and peers for expertise and abilities in two areas for Victoria in the 2023 Doyles Guide. Doyles Guide is a highly regarded independent annual peer review of the leading corporate law firms and lawyers in Victoria.

This video is presented by Planning and Environment Principal, Greg Tobin providing an update on recent changes to the Environment Protection Act 2017 (VIC). Covering the following topics:

Harwood Andrews is delighted to have been identified by clients and peers for expertise and abilities in two areas for Victoria in the 2022 Doyles Guide. Doyle's Guide is a highly regarded independent annual peer review of the leading corporate law firms and lawyers in Victoria.

On 1 July 2021, the Environment Protection Act 2017 (New Act) came into effect.

The new environment protection framework adopts a preventative, risk-based approach to preventing harm to human health and the environment. This is a shift away from the Former Act which adopted a prohibitive, reactionary approach whereby polluters were punished after committing an offence.

Harwood Andrews is delighted to have been identified by clients and peers for expertise and abilities in two areas for Victoria in the 2021 Doyles Guide. Doyle's Guide is a highly regarded independent annual peer review of the leading corporate law firms and lawyers in Victoria.

Harwood Andrews has acted for the City of Greater Geelong in a successful prosecution of the owners of ‘the Ritz’ - a prominent heritage listed building located on Bellerine Street, Geelong.

In a widely expected outcome, the Court of Appeal yesterday refused leave to appeal against the orders of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Hoskin v Greater Bendigo City Council, commonly known as Bendigo Mosque case.

In the lead up to the 2014 State election, the (then) Labor opposition promised to introduce legislation concerning the weight to be given to the number of objections received in respect of a planning permit application.

The answer, according to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Canaan Holdings Pty Ltd v Whitehorse CC [2015] VCAT 1608, is ‘no’.

In February 2015, Whitehorse City Council decided to adopt Amendment C153 to the Whitehorse Planning Scheme (Amendment), which formed part of a combined application under s 96A of the Planning and Environment Act (Act).  Approximately a month late, in March, the Council purported to rescind its decision and to abandon the Amendment.

Harwood Andrews has been appointed as one of only 23 law firms to the new Victorian Government Legal Services Panel. Appointed to the panels for Property and Planning and Environment, Harwood Andrews is the only regional firm represented on the panel.

A recent decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has confirmed further restrictions on the ability of Owners Corporation rules to regulate the use of lots. This decision follows an earlier ruling that Owners Corporations are unable to stop short term leasing of apartments.

A recent VCAT decision has clarified the powers of Owners Corporations to regulate short term leasing. It is common for Owners Corporation Rules to restrict certain activities that can be done in a multi-unit complex.

The Tribunal has recently considered the new reimbursement of fees provisions inserted into the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (VCAT Act) in 2014. 

The Tribunal recently commented upon the role that expert witnesses play in proceedings before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. 

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal  (VCAT) has last week considered the operation of Clause 61.01 which makes the Minister for Planning the responsible authority for certain planning applications within the City of Melbourne. 

Dustday Investments v Minister for Planning & Melbourne City Council [Dustday] represents the first judicial consideration of the current section 12(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

In the recent decision of Calderara v Banyule (Calderara) the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) considered whether section 149(1)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 conferred it jurisdiction to review a Council’s decision not to ‘agree’ to an action restricted under a section 173 agreement.

Jacquier v Maroondah CC [2015] VCAT 217 (‘Jacquier’) is the latest in a series of Tribunal decisions to consider whether a permit application has lost the benefit of the Transitional Provisions in the recently introduced Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ).

In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeal (Warren CJ, Santamaria JA and Garde AJA) upheld the decision of VCAT to grant a planning permit for the demolition and redevelopment of ‘Arden’, a significant heritage place under the Boroondara Planning Scheme (Boroondara City Council v 1045 Burke Road Pty Ltd [2015] VSCA 27). 

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has provided further commentary concerning the use of section 87A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to modify existing planning permits.

Members in the Planning and Environment List have been increasingly reluctant to allow expert witnesses to introduce changes to a development proposal through expert evidence. Parties are expected to seek expert advice early and incorporate any expert recommendations through the amended plans process enabling due notice to be provided to other parties and the Tribunal of a proposed change.

A recent decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has highlighted the risk of relying on online mapping tools to assess whether a site is within an area of ‘cultural heritage sensitivity’ within the meaning of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 and regulations.

A recent decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal confirms the approach in the Planning and Environment List to permit applications where Owners Corporations object.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) has clarified the interpretation of the provisions in all planning schemes in Victoria concerning the subdivision of land parcels which are in two planning zones.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) has found that Owners Corporation special rules purporting to prohibit ‘illegal’ behavior, a relatively common formulation of rule, are unlawful under the legislative regime created by the Owners Corporations Act 2006.