LawCite Search | LawCite Markup Tool | Help | Feedback Law Cite

Slatter v Frankston CC     10

Cases Referring to this Case

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court †	Jurisdiction	Date	Full Text		Citation Index
Bannister v Mornington Peninsula SC	[2016] VCAT 1986	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	1 Dec 2016	AustLII		5
Allen v Mornington Peninsula SC	[2016] VCAT 1609	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	22 Sep 2016	AustLII		2
Carroll v Bass Coast SC	[2013] VCAT 1205	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	12 Jul 2013	AustLII
Krienke v Manningham CC	[2011] VCAT 408	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	17 Mar 2011	AustLII
Gordon v Warrnambool CC	[2009] VCAT 544	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	29 Apr 2009	AustLII		1
Potato Products (Aust) Pty Ltd v Casey CC	[2009] VCAT 52	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	15 Jan 2009	AustLII		5
Hirst v Surf Coast SC (includes Summary) (Red Dot)	[2008] VCAT 1544	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	25 Jul 2008	AustLII		1
Evezard v East Gippsland SC	[2008] VCAT 42	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	17 Jan 2008	AustLII
Cirillo v Darebin CC	[2004] VCAT 1579	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	16 Aug 2004	AustLII
Pedler v Brimbank CC	[2001] VCAT 2275	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	18 Dec 2001	AustLII		3

Legislation Cited

Cases and Articles Cited

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court †	Jurisdiction	Date	Full Text		Citation Index
Pedler v Brimbank CC	[2001] VCAT 2275	Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal	Australia - Victoria	18 Dec 2001	AustLII		3
"It follows that the particular current use to which any land is put should not of itself be regarded as depriving that land of the character of land specially benefited if in fact the proposed work so enhance its value that, in the Council's opinion, it would otherwise qualify as land of that character Enhancement in value without advantage in current user is no more than an indication that the land is not being put to its highest economic use; a special benefit is not to be regarded simply because some lower economic use to which, for the time being, the land is being put precludes advantage being taken of that special benefit "			Australia - Commonwealth	circa 1972	Legal Online / Westlaw		1
Raine Lodge Pty Ltd v Wyndham CC	(1998) 22 AATR 23		Australia - Victoria	19 Jun 1998	AustLII		53