A recent Queensland Audit Office (QAO) report is a timely warning for councils, government-owned entities and public sector agencies: one of the most significant cyber risks may not sit inside your organisation at all, it may sit with your suppliers, vendors, consultants and service providers.
Modern organisations increasingly rely on third parties to deliver IT systems, digital services, software platforms and operational support. That creates efficiency, but it also creates exposure.
The QAO found that the audited entities were not effectively managing third-party cyber security risk, and that weaknesses in access controls, procurement practices and contracts created real vulnerabilities. In testing, the auditors were able to obtain passwords, access systems and extract sensitive information beyond what a third-party user should have been able to access. In two cases, they were able to gain administrator-level access.
That should be a wake-up call.
Importantly, these risks are no longer emerging or hypothetical. They are well understood, documented and repeatedly identified in public sector audits and guidance.
As a result, expectations on organisations, particularly councils and government entities, to identify, assess and actively manage third-party cyber risk are increasing. This is not just a technical issue, but one of governance, accountability and risk ownership.
This is not just an IT issue
Third-party cyber risk sits across:
That is why it is often missed.
Many organisations focus on internal cyber controls, but far fewer are asking the harder questions:
Contracts are often the weak point
One of the most striking findings in the report was contractual weakness.
Of the 36 contracts reviewed:
That means many entities may be carrying supply chain cyber risk without any real contractual visibility or control.
What organisations should be doing now
The QAO’s better practice checklist is a useful starting point. In practical terms, organisations should be reviewing whether they are:
The report also highlights the importance of moving beyond contracting to active contract management.
In practice, this may involve establishing a structured approach to managing third-party cyber risk across the contract lifecycle, including clearly documenting security expectations, conducting periodic supplier reviews or assurance checks, monitoring ongoing risk exposure, and ensuring there are internal processes and capability to respond to cyber incidents and evolving threats.
A practical next step may be to consider whether a more structured contract management approach is needed to manage third-party cyber risk.
This could include:
The real takeaway
Third-party cyber risk is no longer a niche technical issue. It is now a procurement, contract, governance and operational resilience issue.
For councils and public entities, the real question is not whether this risk exists in your supply chain.
It is whether your organisation has the procurement settings, contract protections and governance discipline to manage it properly.
Organisations should now be actively testing whether their current frameworks are sufficient to manage this risk.
How Muscat Tanzer can help
We help councils and government entities build practical frameworks to manage these risks through procurement planning, cyber risk allocation, contract drafting, governance settings and contract management uplift.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Associate
Muscat Tanzer
Cost Escalation is Back — Are Your Contracts Ready?
The recent escalation of conflict in the Middle East is already having tangible, real-time impacts on Australia’s construction sector.
Fuel prices are rising. Oil markets are volatile.
Transport and logistics costs are increasing rapidly.
As always, these pressures are flowing directly into construction.
Contractors and suppliers are beginning to claim price increases, driven by fuel, freight and energy inputs. Materials are becoming more expensive to produce, more expensive to move, and less predictable to price.
This is not a hypothetical future risk. It is happening now.
Recent movements in global oil markets are already translating into domestic price pressure. Australian fuel prices have risen sharply in recent weeks, with ongoing volatility expected as geopolitical tensions continue to impact shipping routes and energy supply chains.
These conditions are already feeding into contractor pricing and supplier cost adjustments. Key indicators to monitor over the coming months include contractor tender behaviour and the frequency of escalation-related claims.
From Stability to Volatility, Again
For much of 2024 and early 2025, there was a sense that the worst of construction cost escalation had passed.
Markets had stabilised. Supply chains had improved.
Pricing had become more predictable. That assumption is now being tested.
The current environment is not just about rising costs; it is about renewed volatility, and that presents a different, more complex risk profile.
Projects that appeared commercially stable even a month ago may now be exposed to rapid input cost fluctuations, particularly those with:
Where the Pressure Will Show First
We are already seeing early indicators across the market, and these will intensify over the coming months.
1. Contractor Pricing Behaviour
Contractors are becoming more cautious in their pricing, including:
shorter validity periods increased contingencies
qualifications around fuel and freight costs increased divergence in pricing between tenderers due to differing assumptions on escalation risk.
In some cases, contractors may decline to hold pricing at all without escalation mechanisms in place to manage their risk.
2. Supplier Price Increase Notices
Suppliers are moving quickly to protect margins, issuing:
fuel surcharge adjustments revised freight rates
updated material pricing linked to energy inputs
These increases will inevitably flow through to head contractors and ultimately to principals.
3. Increased Claims and Disputes
Where contracts are silent or unclear, cost pressure typically manifests as claims.
Expect to see:
A key point of contention will be whether these cost increases fall within the contractor’s assumed risk under a lump sum contract, or whether they give rise to a compensable variation or contractual adjustment.
Not all claims will be well-founded, but all will require time, cost and resources to manage.
4. Stress on Fixed-Price Contracts
Traditional lump sum contract models are particularly exposed where key input markets are volatile.
Without appropriate price adjustment mechanisms:
This is especially acute for longer-term infrastructure and civil projects.
Sustained cost pressure may also increase financial stress across the contractor and subcontractor market, with potential implications for project continuity and delivery risk.
The Real Issue: Risk Allocation, Not Just Price
The key issue is not simply that costs are rising, it is who bears the risk of that increase.
The ordinary rule of thumb in risk allocation is that risk should be borne by the party who is best able to manage that risk. Typically the contractor market is ill-equipped to deal with major and uncontrollable fluctuations in input prices.
Many contracts entered into over the past 12–24 months were negotiated in a relatively stable pricing environment.
They may not adequately address: rapid fuel-driven escalation freight volatility
energy cost shocks supply chain disruption
Where risk allocation is unclear or unbalanced, pressure will surface during delivery.
What Should Councils and Principals Be Doing Now?
This is not a “wait and see” moment. There are practical steps that can and should be taken now.
1. Review Existing Contracts
Identify exposure across your current portfolio: Do rise and fall mechanisms exist?
Are they appropriately drafted and triggered? What cost categories are covered (and excluded)?
Are there notification requirements that will become relevant?
Understanding your contractual position early is critical. Whilst principals are under no obligation to do so, some consideration could be given to proactively negotiating cost escalation mechanisms into existing contracts to maintain contractor performance and engagement on projects.
2. Prepare for an Increase in Claims
Contract administration teams should be ready for: higher volumes of notices
Clear internal processes and disciplined assessment frameworks will be essential.
3. Reassess Procurement Models
For upcoming procurements, consider whether:
Procurement strategies that worked in a stable market may not be fit-for-purpose in a volatile one.
4. Engage Early with the Market
Understanding where risk sits in the supply chain is critical.
Early engagement can provide insight into:
This enables informed, proactive procurement decisions.
5. Focus on Contract Administration Discipline
In volatile environments, outcomes are often determined less by the contract itself and more by how it is administered.
Key focus areas include:
Strong contract administration can materially reduce dispute risk as well as risk of improper incursion of cost from opportunistic claiming.
Looking Ahead
It is too early to predict the duration or extent of current market disruption.
However, one thing is clear: Volatility has returned. Projects that navigate this period successfully will not necessarily be those with the lowest price, but those with:
Final Thought
Cost escalation is no longer a theoretical risk.
It is back — and it is already working its way through the construction sector. Projects that navigate this period successfully will not be those with the lowest price, but those supported by clear risk allocation and well-structured procurement.
The question for councils and principals is simple: Are your contracts, and your procurement strategies, ready for it?
How Muscat Tanzer Can Help
Muscat Tanzer works alongside councils and project teams to navigate exactly these conditions; reviewing contracts to identify exposure, strengthening risk allocation and escalation mechanisms, and supporting procurement strategies that remain viable in volatile markets.
We also assist with real-time contract administration, including assessing and responding to claims as they arise. If cost escalation is beginning to impact your projects, we can help you respond early, manage risk, and maintain delivery outcomes.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
From Compliance Checkpoint to Strategic Partner
Legal and probity advisors are often engaged at the final stage of a procurement — just before release, or when something has gone wrong.
In both cases, their role is typically reactive — reviewing documents for compliance or resolving disputes after issues arise.
But as procurement evolves into a strategic enabler (as explored throughout this Series), the role of legal and probity advisors must evolve with it.
If procurement is to function as a strategic enabler — driving economic development, sustainability, governance and community trust — advisors must be involved earlier and more meaningfully.
The most effective councils do not engage advisors only to “sign off” on compliance.
They involve them early — as partners in governance, risk design and strategic delivery.
The Limitation of the Reactive Model
When legal or probity advisors are engaged late:
Compliance may be achieved — but strategic value can be compromised.
What Strategic Advisory Looks Like
High-performing councils involve advisors during:
This approach strengthens governance while enabling innovation.
Where Advisors Add the Most Value
Legal and probity advisors can assist by:
When properly structured, early engagement strengthens competition rather than undermines probity.
Strategic advisors add value by:
This reduces the likelihood of challenge while improving transparency and defensibility.
Strategic legal input helps ensure:
Contracts should reflect strategic intent — not just generic templates.
These decisions carry governance risk.
Strategic advisors assist by:
Clear documentation protects both the organisation and individual decision-makers.
It’s About Governance Confidence
Strategic advisors do not slow procurement down.
They:
The goal is not risk avoidance.
It is confident, structured risk management aligned with council objectives.
As councils face increasing scrutiny and complex procurement environments, engaging legal and probity advisors early can transform procurement from a compliance function into a strategic capability.
At Muscat Tanzer, we work with councils as proactive partners in procurement governance — helping move from reactive review to strategic implementation.
If your council is reviewing its procurement governance model, we would be pleased to discuss how strategic advisory engagement can support stronger outcomes, or we can provide probity training to our officers, executive or councillors.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Infrastructure delivery is one of the most complex and high-risk areas of procurement for councils.
Major projects – whether roads, waste facilities, water infrastructure, community assets or urban revitalisation programs – involve significant capital investment, technical complexity and long asset lifecycles.
Yet procurement risk is often viewed too narrowly.
Many councils focus heavily on running a compliant tender process. But the most significant risks in infrastructure delivery often arise outside the tender stage.
They emerge across the full lifecycle:
Strategic procurement ensures these stages are aligned.
The Importance of Early Procurement Strategy
Some of the most important procurement decisions occur before any tender is released.
This includes considering:
When procurement strategy is integrated into early project planning, infrastructure delivery becomes more predictable and defensible.
Selecting the Right Procurement Model
Different projects require different approaches.
Common models include:
A one-size-fits-all approach rarely delivers optimal outcomes.
The procurement model should reflect the complexity, risk profile and innovation requirements of the project.
Risk Allocation and Contract Design
Contract structure is critical in infrastructure procurement.
Effective contracts:
Overly aggressive risk transfer can increase pricing and lead to disputes.
Balanced risk allocation supports collaboration and delivery certainty.
Contract Management Is Where Value Is Protected
Even the best procurement strategy can fail without strong contract management.
Councils should ensure:
Procurement success is ultimately measured during delivery.
Why This Matters
Infrastructure projects represent a significant investment of public funds and shape communities for decades.
Strategic procurement helps ensure these investments deliver:
Procurement in infrastructure delivery is not simply about running a compliant tender.
It is about managing risk and performance across the entire asset lifecycle.
How Muscat Tanzer Can Help
At Muscat Tanzer, we work with councils to design and deliver infrastructure procurement strategies that are legally robust, commercially balanced and aligned with long-term asset performance.
Our support includes:
We help councils manage infrastructure procurement risk from project concept through to operational performance.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Turning Policy Intent into Measurable Outcomes
Councils are under increasing pressure to demonstrate leadership in sustainability, climate resilience, social inclusion and responsible governance.
Community expectations are rising.
State policy settings are evolving.
Infrastructure investment is accelerating.
Procurement sits at the centre of this shift.
As one of the largest levers councils control, procurement can either reinforce business-as-usual practices — or actively drive environmental, social and governance (ESG) outcomes and circular economy innovation.
The question is not whether councils should embed ESG in procurement.
It is how to do so lawfully, defensibly and practically.
Moving Beyond Statements of Intent
Many procurement policies now reference sustainability, local participation and social outcomes.
However, embedding ESG effectively requires more than:
Strategic ESG procurement means integrating outcomes across the full lifecycle:
Without this integration, ESG remains aspirational rather than operational.
Aligning ESG with the IP&R Framework
Under the Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) Framework, councils are already required to link resources to community strategic objectives.
Embedding ESG through procurement strengthens that alignment by:
Procurement becomes a delivery mechanism for strategic objectives — not an isolated administrative function.
Environmental Outcomes: From Compliance to Innovation
Environmental considerations may include:
To embed these effectively, councils should:
Well-designed environmental procurement reduces long-term financial and climate risk.
Social Value and Local Economic Participation
Social procurement can support:
However, these must be structured carefully to remain compliant with competition and probity requirements.
Practical measures include:
Social value must be defined, measurable and proportionate to the procurement.
Governance: The Often Overlooked ESG Pillar
ESG is not only environmental and social. Governance is equally critical.
Procurement governance supports ESG by:
Strong governance ensures ESG commitments are defensible and withstand scrutiny.
The Circular Economy Opportunity
The circular economy moves beyond waste reduction to redesigning how goods and services are procured, used and disposed of.
For councils, this may involve:
Circular procurement can reduce lifecycle costs, minimise landfill dependency and stimulate local innovation.
Avoiding Common Pitfalls
Embedding ESG in procurement must remain proportionate and defensible.
Common risks include:
Strategic ESG procurement balances aspiration with legal and operational requirements.
Measuring What Matters
To move from aspiration to impact, councils should measure:
Data transforms ESG procurement from words to evidence.
Why This Matters for Councils
Embedding ESG and circular economy principles in procurement enables councils to:
Procurement is not merely a compliance process.
It is a powerful policy delivery mechanism.
Practical First Steps
Councils seeking to strengthen ESG procurement capability should consider:
Small structural changes create measurable long-term impact.
How Muscat Tanzer Can Help
At Muscat Tanzer, we work with councils to embed ESG and circular economy principles into procurement frameworks
Our support includes:
We help councils move from ESG aspiration to measurable procurement performance.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Across NSW local government, procurement frameworks have matured. Policies align with the Local Government Act, the Local Government (General) Regulation, and the IP&R Framework. Sustainability, local participation and governance principles are embedded on paper.
But many councils are asking the same question:
Why does strategic procurement still feel difficult in practice?
The answer is capability.
Policy reform is only the first step. Strategic procurement is delivered by confident staff applying clear governance, practical tools and consistent contract management across the lifecycle.
The Gap Between Framework and Delivery
Common challenges include:
The issue is not commitment — it is translation.
Councils must move from policy compliance to organisational capability.
What Procurement Capability Actually Looks Like
True capability combines:
✔ Clear delegations and decision-making pathways
✔ Practical templates that embed policy principles
✔ Role-based training (not generic theory)
✔ Structured contract management processes
✔ Data and reporting to measure performance
When these elements align, procurement becomes a strategic enabler — not an administrative checkpoint.
Why Contract Management Is the Missing Piece
Many councils run robust tender processes but lose value during delivery.
Capability maturity means:
Value for money is realised during contract performance — not just at evaluation.
A Simple Maturity Lens
Councils typically move through four stages:
The transition from Stage 2 to Stage 4 is a capability journey — not a policy rewrite.
Practical First Steps
Small structural improvements create long-term strategic impact.
Why This Matters
Procurement is one of the largest levers councils hold to drive:
Those outcomes are not delivered through policy alone.
They are delivered by capable people, applying structured systems, with confidence.
At Muscat Tanzer, we work with NSW councils to move from procurement as process to procurement as performance — strengthening governance and delivering measurable community benefit.
If you would like to discuss procurement capability uplift in your council, we would be pleased to assist.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
The Queensland Government’s Logan to Gold Coast Faster Rail project is a major piece of transport infrastructure aimed at easing congestion and improving rail reliability between Brisbane and the Gold Coast. While the project promises long-term benefits for the region, it may also have very real and immediate implications for property owners along the rail corridor.
This article explains what the project involves, how compulsory acquisition works in Queensland, and what landowners should do if their property is affected.
What is the Logan to Gold Coast Faster Rail project?
The Logan to Gold Coast Faster Rail project focuses on the busy rail corridor between Kuraby and Beenleigh, spanning approximately 20 kilometres. At a high level, the project involves:
To deliver these outcomes, additional rail infrastructure, land, and construction access will be required along parts of the corridor. This means some private land may need to be acquired, either permanently or temporarily, to enable the works.
What is compulsory acquisition in Queensland?
Compulsory acquisition is the process by which a government authority can lawfully acquire private land for a public purpose, such as transport infrastructure.
In Queensland, compulsory acquisition is governed by legislation that balances the State’s need to deliver critical infrastructure with the rights of affected property owners. Importantly, land cannot simply be taken without process or compensation.
Key features of compulsory acquisition include:
What rights do property owners have?
If your land is affected by the Faster Rail project, you have clear legal rights. These include the right to:
Compulsory acquisition can also involve temporary construction easements or partial acquisitions, each of which raises different legal and valuation issues that should be carefully assessed.
How Muscat Tanzer can assist
Compulsory acquisition is a technical and time-sensitive process, and early advice can make a significant difference to outcomes.
Muscat Tanzer regularly assists landowners, businesses, and developers affected by government infrastructure projects. We can help you:
If your property is located along the Logan to Gold Coast rail corridor and you have received notice — or anticipate that your land may be affected — we encourage you to seek advice early.
Please contact Muscat Tanzer to discuss how we can assist you in protecting your interests and securing fair compensation.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Associate
Muscat Tanzer
Many local government contracts still focus on inputs: hours worked, activities completed, materials supplied. While familiar, this approach does not always deliver the outcomes councils and communities actually care about.
Outcome-based procurement offers a different approach. Rather than paying solely for effort, councils link performance and payment to clearly defined results — improving service quality, encouraging innovation, and strengthening accountability within the existing legislative framework.
Why Input-Based Contracting Falls Short
Traditional contracts often:
As financial pressure and scrutiny increase, councils are being asked to demonstrate not just value for money, but value delivered.
What Outcome-Based Procurement Really Means
Outcome-based procurement does not remove scope or governance. It reframes success.
Key features include:
The focus shifts from managing inputs to managing performance.
Where It Works Best
Outcome-based procurement is particularly effective for services such as:
It is not suitable for every procurement — proportionality and capability remain critical.
Designing Outcomes That Work
Effective outcome frameworks:
Poorly defined outcomes create dispute risk. Well-designed outcomes reduce it.
Paying for Performance, Not Just Activity
Successful outcome-based contracts typically use:
The goal is alignment — ensuring supplier incentives support council objectives.
Governance Still Matters
Outcome-based procurement must be built into the procurement process from the start. Evaluation criteria, contract terms and performance reporting all need to align.
Strong contract management capability is essential — outcomes only work if they are actively monitored and enforced.
From Process to Performance
Councils that adopt outcome-based procurement well often see:
Outcome-based procurement is not about shifting risk blindly. It is about paying for what matters.
At Muscat Tanzer, we support NSW councils to design outcome-based procurement models that are legally compliant, commercially realistic and operationally workable.
Our support includes:
Outcome-based procurement moves councils beyond buying activity — toward buying results that deliver real community value.
Director
Muscat Tanzer
Throughout 2025 the Planning and Environment Court delivered a series of decisions that will influence the approach of developers, consultants and local governments in the year ahead. The judgments cover a wide range of issues from minor change assessments to infrastructure charging, subdivision proposals, environmental constraints, childcare centres and coastal apartment development. The consistent theme across these decisions is a careful reinforcement of statutory requirements and a strong emphasis on planning scheme intent, good design, environmental protection and justified decision making.
Minor changes and the importance of external built form
In the decision concerning SVMJ 1234 Pty Ltd v Moreton Bay Regional Council [2025] QPEC 7 (31 March 2025) the Court rejected an attempt to categorise a series of design amendments as a minor change. Although the changes reduced the number of tenancies and the total gross floor area and improved some functional outcomes, the Court found that the revised design materially altered the building’s presentation to the street. The new arrangement changed the scale, architectural expression and character of the development. As a result the proposal was not considered a minor change. The decision confirms that reductions in floor area or tenancy numbers are not automatically decisive. Where amendments significantly influence the appearance or presence of a development in the public realm, they are unlikely to qualify as minor.
Infrastructure charging and the limits of Council power
The judgment involving OPD Developers Pty Ltd & Anor v Logan City Council [2025] QPEC 8 (30 April 2025) provides important guidance on the circumstances in which an infrastructure charges notice can be issued. The project involved a private hospital already authorised by a Ministerial Infrastructure Designation which meant the use was accepted development. The Council later issued an infrastructure charges notice after a building certifier approved building work. The Court declared the charges notice invalid because the accepted development status meant there was no new demand on trunk infrastructure that could lawfully support a charge. The building approval did not generate additional demand beyond what the designation already contemplated. The decision clarifies that a charges notice cannot be issued simply because a building approval exists. There must be extra demand created by development that actually requires approval.
Delays, amendments and the consequences of failing to raise issues in time
In Nucrush Pty Ltd v Gold Coast City Council & Ors (No 2) [2025] QPEC 10 (28 May 2025) the Court rejected an attempt by the Council to add new reasons for refusal based on updated ecological mapping. The Council became aware of the mapping changes years earlier but raised the issue only after significant delay. The Court found the explanation for that delay inadequate and accepted that the appellant would suffer prejudice if the new issues were introduced at such a late stage. The decision serves as a clear reminder that appeal proceedings must be conducted efficiently. Attempts to introduce new arguments or evidentiary foundations late in the process will be closely scrutinised and are unlikely to be permitted without compelling justification.
Referral agency functions and the meaning of a refusal
In the matter involving Leeward Management Pty Ltd v Brisbane City Council [2025] QPEC 17 (4 July 2025) the Court examined whether the absence of a referral agency response amounted to a part refusal. The certifier argued that the missing material triggered an appeal right. The Court disagreed and accepted that the Council’s conduct did not constitute any form of refusal for the purpose of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld). The decision affirms that there can be a single development application even when an assessment manager also performs referral agency functions. It also clarifies that the omission of a particular document or stamp does not automatically amount to a refusal and will not create an appeal right unless it genuinely reflects a refusal of part of the application.
Small lot subdivisions and the protection of neighbourhood character
The decision in Wells & Anor v Brisbane City Council [2025] QPEC 22 (17 October 2025) involved a proposal to convert an addition to an existing dwelling into a separate dwelling on a very small new lot. Although the structure already existed, the Court identified significant conflict with the planning scheme. The Character Residential Zone anticipates larger lots that retain traditional suburbs with generous gardens and established vegetation. The proposed new lots were among the smallest in the precinct and were inconsistent with the intended pattern of development. One of the lots was also highly flood prone and would be largely inundated in a severe event. The Court concluded that the proposal represented an overdevelopment of the land and that it failed to minimise flood risk. This outcome reinforces that character is not limited to how buildings appear. The rhythm of lot sizes and the quality of open space are equally important.
Childcare centre approvals and the continuing relevance of demonstrated need
The appeal involving McNamara-Healy Holdings Pty Ltd v Redland City Council & Ors [2025] QPEC 23 (22 October 2025) concerned a proposed childcare centre at Birkdale Road. The Court found that there was a clear community and economic need for additional childcare services. Although the proposal was not small in scale, its design was compatible with its mixed use context and did not produce unacceptable amenity impacts. The Court accepted that the development substantially complied with relevant assessment benchmarks and that the combination of need, design and context justified approval. The decision demonstrates that well supported need evidence remains influential when a proposal departs from aspects of the planning scheme but still represents a positive planning outcome.
Environmental constraints and the difficulty of clearing sensitive land
The appeal in Brades Property Agnes Water Pty Ltd v Gladstone Regional Council [2025] QPEC 24 (24 October 2025) involved a proposal for a major low density subdivision on a heavily vegetated site at Agnes Water. The Court concluded that the proposal failed to avoid or minimise impacts on important ecological values and that the proponent had not demonstrated a sufficient level of community or economic need to justify the clearing of the site. The environmental offset strategy was found to be inadequate. The Court also declined to give determinative weight to the existing approval for a manufactured housing estate because of concerns about its practical implementation. The decision highlights the significant challenges facing large scale residential proposals in environmentally sensitive locations.
Privacy, conditions and the finality of merits decisions
The matter involving Aesthete No. 15 Pty Ltd & Anor v Council of the City of Gold Coast & Anor (No. 2) [2025] QPEC 25 (5 November 2025) returned to Court solely to resolve a dispute about conditions after the merits of the development had already been decided. The adjoining landowners sought additional privacy screening on several levels of the approved building. The Court refused the request. It observed that the privacy interface had already been considered and resolved in the merits judgment and that the additional screening was not reasonably required. The decision reinforces that conditions cannot be used to revisit issues that the Court has already determined.
What these decisions mean for 2026
The 2025 judgments collectively establish a clear direction for planning and development in 2026. Amendments to approved designs must respect the external presentation of buildings. Infrastructure charging must be limited to genuine extra demand created by assessable development. Appeals must be prosecuted diligently and without undue delay. Character protections will continue to be applied with real force, particularly in established neighbourhoods. Environmental considerations carry substantial weight, especially where large areas of vegetation are proposed to be cleared. Evidence of community need remains capable of supporting proposals that otherwise raise concerns. Conditions will not be used to re-open matters already decided.
Together, these decisions set strong expectations for clarity, justification and respect for planning scheme intent as development activity continues to intensify across Queensland.
How We Can Help
Planning law does not operate in the abstract. It is continually refined by how the Court applies it to real projects, sites and disputes.
At Muscat Tanzer, we have the resources to critically evaluate what recent Planning and Environment Court decisions mean in practice and how they should inform strategy, design and decision-making going forward.
We assist with:
Understanding how the Court is approaching planning issues is critical to reducing risk and avoiding costly missteps. We help our clients anticipate how arguments are likely to be tested and make informed decisions with clarity and confidence.
Associate
Muscat Tanzer
Lawyer
Muscat Tanzer
The Queensland Government has recently introduced the Planning Amendment Regulation 2025, which updates the Planning Regulation 2017 (Qld). These changes aim to improve housing supply, streamline approvals for essential education infrastructure and strengthen safety and design standards. The amendments focus on four key areas:
Housing Accommodation
The Government has extended the streamlined provisions for rooming accommodation until 2 December 2026. These changes are designed to ensure a steady supply of rental housing while Local Governments update their planning schemes. Key changes include:
Rural Workers’ Accommodation
Temporary pathways under the Queensland Rural Workers Accommodation Initiative have been extended to simplify approvals for rural worker housing projects. Key updates include:
Community Residence
Community residences provide housing for people who need assistance with daily living and promote inclusion in residential neighbourhoods. The amendments introduce clear design, siting and hazard considerations. Key changes include:
Why it matters:
Temporary Relocatable Classrooms for State Schools
To accommodate growing enrolments, a Temporary Accepted Development (TAD) pathway has been introduced for relocatable classrooms. This pathway will operate until 31 December 2029. Key points:
This pathway ensures that schools can quickly respond to enrolment growth without creating long-term impacts on school sites or surrounding communities.
Build-to-Rent Housing
A new land use definition for build-to-rent housing has been introduced, providing clarity for Local Governments and developers.
What is built-to-rent housing?
Why it matters:
Common features include:
Location suitability:
Conclusion
The Planning Amendment Regulation 2025 is a significant step by the Queensland Government to:
These changes provide greater certainty for developers, Local Governments and residents, while addressing housing supply challenges and supporting community infrastructure.
How We Can Help
At Muscat Tanzer, we work with private clients, developers and Local Governments to deliver planning, property and infrastructure outcomes that are strategic, compliant and practical.
Our support includes:
Effective planning is not just about obtaining an approval. It is about making informed decisions early and at every stage of the process. At Muscat Tanzer, we help our clients navigate complexity, manage risk, deliver projects and address planning concerns with confidence and clarity.
Associate
Muscat Tanzer
Lawyer
Muscat Tanzer
