Tim Quirk

About Tim

Tim leads Thynne + Macartney's Planning + Environment team and has nearly 25 years' experience practising in planning and environment and local government law in Queensland.

Tim provides a complete offering for all planning and environment matters.

He works closely with clients to understand their objectives and to guide them through the intricacies of planning and environment law to create the best commercial result with minimal delay or obstruction.

As well as experience in litigation in the Land Court and Planning and Environment Court (enforcement and prosecution proceedings for development and environmental offences), Tim also provides advice concerning development, management and compliance with environmental authorities, infrastructure agreements and compulsory acquisitions.

Since 2020, Tim has won a number of landmark planning and environment matters in the Planning and Environment Court. He is sought out by clients looking to resolve difficult and high profile planning and environment disputes.

Significant cases include:

• Abeleda & Anor vs Brisbane City Council [2020] QCA 257
• Cannon Hill Investments Pty Ltd & Anor v Malt Brewing Company Pty Ltd Trading as Revel Brewing Company & Ors [2021] QCA 281
• Cannon Hill Investments Pty Ltd & Anor v Malt Brewing Company Pty Ltd & Ors [2021] QPEC 30
• Edith Pastoral Company Pty Ltd v Somerset Regional Council & Ors [2021] QPEC 52
• Noosa Spotlight Property 2 Pty Ltd v Noosa Shire Council [2021] QPEC 77
• Bell Co Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Gold Coast [2022] QPEC 32
• Cannon Hill Investments Pty Ltd and Australian Country Choice Production Pty Ltd trading as Australian Country Choice Group v Brisbane City Council [2022] QPEC 32

Working closely with clients to understand their objectives, Tim guides them through the intricacies of planning and environment law to create the best commercial result with minimal delay or obstruction.

Tim's extensive experience includes acting for local government clients and he is appointed to the Local Buy panel.

Awards & Recognition

Best Lawyers Australia

• Land Use & Zoning (2017-2024)
  • Lawyer of the Year for Land Use & Zoning (2020)
• Planning & Environment (2017-2024)

Doyle's Guide Queensland

• Planning & Development - Recommended (2015-2023)

• Environment & Heritage - Recommended (2019)

Lawyers Weekly - Partner of the Year Awards

• Partner of the Year for Planning & Environment - Finalist (2018 and 2021-2023)

Queensland Law Society - Excellence in Law Awards

• Queensland Solicitor of the Year (Large Firm: 20+ PCs) - Finalist (2022-2023)

Qualifications

• Admitted as a solicitor to the Supreme Court of Queensland in September 2000
• Bachelor of Laws (Honours) - Queensland University of Technology

Memberships & Appointments

• Planning Institute of Australia
• Planning Professionals in Australia & New Zealand
• Queensland Environmental Law Association
• Queensland Law Society
• Urban Development Institute of Australia (Qld)
• Local Buy

 

Relevant Experience

• Successfully represented Noosa Council in respect of its decision to refuse a large retail development application for a permit to develop land into a precinct called "Noosa Marketplace"
• Successfully represented residents of Hedges Avenue, Gold Coast, in an appeal before the Planning and Environment Court which resulted in the dismissal of a four-storey apartment complex that was found to be inconsistent with the special identity and sense of place enjoyed by the residents of the predominantly two-storey beachside area. This was the first time the Court allowed an appeal decided on whether the new proposed development was compliant with the Gold Coast City Council's building height uplift provisions. Earlier Court appeals had considered these provisions but the challenges (typically by the adjacent residents) had been unsuccessful.
• Successfully represented Silverstone Developments as second respondents in a case involving approval by the Brisbane City Council for the development application for a multi-storey car park. Where the QCA dismissed the appeal in its entirety affirming the P&E Court’s interpretation of the Planning Act providing for a broader, more flexible development assessment framework and upholding the wider interpretation of the discretion under section 60(3) of the Planning Act.
• Successfully defending an action brought by an adjoining landowner to overturn a decision of Brisbane City Council allowing the development of one of Australia's largest indoor gyms.
• Successful representation of our clients in having an originating application dismissed on the basis the applicant had not demonstrated any error in categorization or discharged the onus of demonstrating material noncompliance for a development permit for a material change of use for High Impact Industry and a Food and Drink Outlet.
• Dismissal of injunctive proceedings related to council approval of extensive renovations and redevelopments involving installation of a swimming pool and retaining wall where the Planning and Environment Court found for our client in the first instance and, on appeal, the Court dismissed the application in favour of our client with costs awarded against the unsuccessful applicant.
• Dismissal of a submitter appeal against the approval of a 5-storey luxury apartment adjacent to the Brisbane River where the neighbours asserted the proposed development was too large and overbearing and would have unacceptable impacts on the amenity of their home and the street in general.
• Resolution of a submitter appeal against the approval for a 15-storey apartment complex located in a Brisbane riverside suburb where the appeal was resolved in a matter of weeks from filing resulting in the development proceeding without significant delay.
• Representation of a pastoral company in relation to an appeal where a development application for a permit for a hard rock quarry and concrete batching plant was denied.