SUPREME COURT SENDS SHALOM HOUSE DIS­PUTE BACK TO TRI­BUNAL:

Midland Reporter - - Front Page -

A DEVEL­OP­MENT ap­pli­ca­tion for Shalom House will be sent back to the State Ad­min­is­tra­tive Tri­bunal (SAT) af­ter a de­ci­sion by the Supreme Court.

Af­ter seven months of de­lib­er­at­ing, the Supreme Court found in favour of the City of Swan’s ap­peal against the SAT’s clas­si­fi­ca­tion of Shalom House and Shalom House’s cross-ap­peal.

The mat­ter will be re­turned to SAT for fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion.

City of Swan Mayor Mick Wain­wright said the City orig­i­nally re­fused the Shalom House devel­op­ment ap­pli­ca­tion be­cause the build­ing was clas­si­fied as a ‘res­i­den­tial build­ing’, which did not al­low the or­gan­i­sa­tion to be run from there.

“Shalom House then ap­pealed that de­ci­sion to SAT and asked for the build­ing to be re­clas­si­fied as ‘com­mu­nity pur­pose’ so that the or­gan­i­sa­tion could con­tinue to op­er­ate from that lo­ca­tion,” he said.

“How­ever, SAT found that the build­ing should in­stead be clas­si­fied as ‘use not listed’ and asked the City to re­con­sider the clas­si­fi­ca­tion.

“The City be­lieved al­low­ing this clas­si­fi­ca­tion could im­pact the Lo­cal Plan­ning Scheme No. 17 and the en­tire City, so ap­pealed the de­ci­sion to the Supreme Court.

“The Supreme Court has now found that SAT made er­rors in the in­ter­pre­ta­tion of the def­i­ni­tion of both the ‘res­i­den­tial build­ing’ and ‘com­mu­nity pur­poses’ clas­si­fi­ca­tions and has sent the mat­ter back to SAT for fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion.”

The mat­ter is sched­uled to be re­turned to SAT on Au­gust 25.

Mayor Wain­wright said while the City was re­lieved a de­ci­sion had been handed down, it would be some time be­fore next steps could be de­ter­mined.

“This process will take some time. How­ever, we will en­sure the com­mu­nity is kept up to date with any progress or in­for­ma­tion as it comes to hand via the City’s web­site,” he said,

Shalom House founder Peter Lyn­don-James said the Supreme Court de­ci­sion was a good re­sult for Shalom House.

“It means that it stays open and we are able to con­tinue our work in restor­ing the lives of men and fam­i­lies in our com­mu­nity,” he said.

“This de­ci­sion is one step to­ward an out­come.”

Steen­hof Brothers lawyer Si­mon Steen­hof, Shalom House founder Peter Lyn­don and John Steen­hof.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.