No appeal decision

But Judge Mullaly said Miss Duncan was very experienced and he could not imagine she would make that error.

Before Thursday’s court hearing, Judge Mullaly had requested both parties – the Turners and Baw Baw Shire – prepare chronologies of events.

The Turners also were required to justify why the appeal should be heard, given it was more than two years since the first court order.

“It is asserted this is an exceptional circumstance. It is two and a half years since the first order and multiple, costly hearings since then,” Judge Mullaly said.

The judge asked why the appeal had been lodged outside the normal period of appeal following the October hearing.

Defence barrister David Pumpa said Mr Turner had been dealing with a number of break-ins on the site after a number of press reports relating to the demolition.

Mr Pumpa said after the break-ins Mr Turner spent two weeks on the site for ongoing surveillance.

“So this man, who is a capable businessman, doesn’t lodge papers because he was engaged in ongoing surveillance on the site because of the thefts?” Judge Mullaly asked.

“More often than not, people appeal on the date they get the result,” he said.

Mr Pumpa said the exceptional circumstances in this case related to council having ongoing discussions about future development of the site and the building surveyor’s issue about safety of buildings on the site.

Mr Pumpa said the opinion that the building was a threat to health and safety was made some time ago.

“The building is still there and there doesn’t appear to have been any change,” he said.

At the October Magistrates’ Court hearing, magistrate Fiona Hayes warned the Turners if they did not undertake the works she would consider imprisonment.

Judge Mullaly said he was concerned the appeal only came about following the threat of imprisonment.

He said it was like someone continually not meeting requirements of a community order and then when faced with jail, the person appealed the original decision.

“How did they (the Turners) think it was going to end. Did they think the magistrate was going to fine them a number of times and then it would just resolve,” the judge asked.

The shire’s barrister Sam Stafford said any discussions about future development of the property were quite separate to court orders relating to demolition of the buildings.

“The delay has been characterised by the commercial convenience for the Turners.

“It is not credible to say there has been any confusion. There were dates set by the court that were in essence milestones.

Mr Stafford said these matters related to building notices first issued in 2012.

Judge Mullaly will make a decision on the merit of the appeals on May 1.