The Australian Developer
SAT 10.10.2026CASH RATE 4.60%10-YR 5.400.01AUD US.69790.33%Newsletter

Court dismisses challenge to Paddington three-storey house

The council's February approval stands after a two-day hearing found no jurisdictional error on any ground raised.

Edited by Hannah Kelly · How we report
The Daily IndexEvery Brisbane deal, approval and collapse, in your inbox each morning.Get it free →
9.9 mapproximate maximum height per planner's report
3storeys
2hearing days
7 Octjudgment date

The Planning and Environment Court has dismissed a neighbour’s challenge to Brisbane City Council’s approval of a three-storey house at 18 Cochrane Street, Paddington. Judge McDonnell delivered the decision, [2026] QPEC 36, on 7 October 2026. Costs are still to be heard.

The site is Lot 17 on RP20657, in the Traditional Building Character overlay. Hayward Developments Pty Ltd was the development applicant and Ashton Int Pty Ltd the landowner. The approval covered a material change of use for a dwelling house.

Why it matters

For builders and developers working in Brisbane’s character suburbs, the ruling shows how narrow the court route is for a neighbour. The challenge was an originating application alleging jurisdictional error, not a merits appeal, and the court found none on any ground raised.

The judgment records that no party disputed the house is more than two storeys. The planner’s report put maximum height at about 9.9 m, against a 9.5 m figure cited in the neighbour’s grounds. The court also dealt with how City Plan defines building height and storey. Judge McDonnell said “the words ‘of the building’ identify the subject matter of the definition.”

The grounds also took in the assessment benchmarks, the visual catchment, and amenity and character. None succeeded.

The numbers

  • Height: about 9.9 m maximum, per the town planner’s report.
  • Storeys: three.
  • Timeline: decision notice 12 February 2026, originating application 27 February, hearing 3 and 4 September, judgment 7 October. That is roughly eight months from approval to judgment.
  • Orders: originating application dismissed, with costs to be heard.

What’s next

The approval stands. The building work approvals were not challenged. The parties will be heard on costs. An appeal is open in principle, but nothing on the record shows one has been filed.

Builders should read the full judgment before relying on it for height arguments, because it turns on the facts of this approval. For wider approval and supply activity, see our Queensland hub.

What we checked

What we checked ourselves, and where you can check it too.

  • Public recordBrisbane City Council issued its decision notice on 12 February 2026, the originating application was filed on 27 February, the hearing ran 3 and 4 September and judgment was delivered on 7 October 2026.View the record on queenslandjudgments.com.au

On the record

Get tomorrow's Index

Every notable filing, deal, and approval in Australian development, ranked, in one three‑minute read each morning. Free.

Your market