Launceston City Council to pay $40,000 Legal Bill

The Launceston City Council has once again wasted ratepayers money. Here is a great article on the recent cost order against the City Council.

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/4491147/court-costs-for-preacher-total-40000/

Why doesn't the City Council learn from other Councils? If Adelaide spent $750,000 trying to stop preachers in the city mall and failed then why does the Launceston City Council think they can et a better result? The High Court ruled clearly that permits can only be rejected if preaching cannot be accommodated having regard to the safe and convenient use of roads. 

Its worth repeating the words of the High Court Justices in 2003 on the matter of public preaching. In Attorney-General (SA) v Corporation of the City of Adelaide (2013) where the High court upheld the validity of the Adelaide by-law Justices Crennan and Kiefel JJ, with whom Bell J agreed, stated;

Given that the discretion must be exercised conformably with the purposes of the By-law, it may be assumed that permission will be denied only where the activities in question cannot be accommodated having regard to the safety and convenience of road users.

And Hayne J said;

On the proper construction of the impugned by-law, the concern of those who must decide whether to grant or withhold consent is confined to the practical question of whether the grant of permission will likely create an unacceptable obstruction of the road in question.