Vitosh v Brisbane City Council [1955] HCA 52

High Court of Australia Dixon C.J. McTiernan, Williams, Webb and Taylor JJ. Vitosh v Brisbane City Council [1955] HCA 52

ORDER Appeal allowed with costs. Judgment of Matthews J. discharged. In lieu thereof declare that the resolution dated 6th December 1932 of the defendant council is invalid. Order that the plaintiff have the costs of the action and the defendant the costs of the counter-claim and that such costs be set off.

The judgment of the Court was delivered by Dixon C.J.

Dixon C.J., McTiernan, Williams, Webb and Taylor JJ.

This is an appeal against a judgment of Matthews J. by which the plaintiff's claim in an action against the defendant, the Brisbane City Council, was dismissed with costs. His Honour gave judgment against the plaintiff upon a counter-claim by the defendant, but that counter-claim is no longer in question.

By his claim in the action the plaintiff sought relief against a resolution of the Brisbane City Council by which lands of a given description were declared to be a residential district or districts and against the refusal of the council to relax the provisions which that resolution contained. The plaintiff claimed certain consequential relief, including damages.

By s. 36, sub-s. (1), of The City of Brisbane Act of 1924 Q. the Council of the City of Brisbane is charged with the government of the city and has the control of the working and business of such government. Sub-section (2) of s. 36, empowers the council to make ordinances for promoting and maintaining certain purposes which include the general good government of the city and of its inhabitants. Sub-section (3) of s. 36 extends the power of the council. Among the matters included in the extension are the sub-division of land, the use and occupation of land, and the use and occupation of buildings and generally all works matters and things in the opinion of the council necessary or conducive to good government of the city and the well-being of its inhabitants.