1. Under s 60 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic), the following person are joined as a party to the proceeding:

Leonardus Wilhelmus Schlooz;

Julie Elizabeth Baulch;

Rowena Miller;

Sharni Gust and Sam Gust; and

Julie Powell and Evan Zammit.

1. Under s 127 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic), the application is amended by the substitution of Attachment 4 filed with VCAT on 5 December 2025.

1. By 4pm on 23 December 2025, Leonardus Wilhelmus Schlooz, Julie Elizabeth Baulch, Rowena Miller, Sharni Gust and Sam Gust; and Julie Powell and Evan Zammit must give VCAT, and all other parties amended statements of grounds that address the amendments to Planning Permit PA1611.

1. The proceeding is listed for a compulsory conference and a hearing as detailed below.

If there is any change to these details, the Tribunal will notify you.

VCAT Melbourne, 55 King Street, MELBOURNE VIC 3000

28 & 29 January 2026

10:00am - 4:30pm

VCAT Melbourne, 55 King Street, MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Details of the location of the compulsory conference and hearing will be published on the Tribunal's website, under 'Upcoming Hearings' on the afternoon of the day prior to the hearing - www.vcat.vic.gov.au/upcoming-hearings

1. All parties must attend the compulsory conference either in person or by a representative who has permission to settle the proceeding on their behalf.

(Note: See more information in Appendix A of this order).

1. No later than 10 business days before the compulsory conference the applicant must give all parties a copy of any amended documents it wants to discuss or rely upon at the compulsory conference.
2. No later than 5 business days before the compulsory conference the responsible authority must give the Tribunal and all parties a copy of draft permit conditions that may be discussed at the compulsory conference. A copy of the conditions must be brought to the compulsory conference in electronic Word format.
3. Any document to be relied on for the compulsory conference that is provided to the Tribunal must be clearly marked "For Compulsory Conference".

1. No later than 5 business days before the hearing, the parties must provide an electronic copy of their submissions and associated material (such as supporting documents, case law and photographs) to the Tribunal and all parties. The copy for the Tribunal must be sent to admin@courts.vic.gov.au
2. All expert evidence must be provided in accordance with the Tribunal's Practice Note PNVCAT2 Expert Evidence.

1. If you are the applicant in this proceeding, you may be required to pay a daily hearing fee before the hearing commences. For more information, see the VCAT website www.vcat.vic.gov.au/fees

1. This proceeding was listed for a practice day hearing to consider the joinder of persons that have filed a statement of grounds and have indicated that they wish to be heard at the hearing.
2. To that end, the following persons seek joinder under s 60 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) ('VCAT Act'):
   1. Leonardus Wilhelmus Schlooz;
   2. Julie Elizabeth Baulch;
   3. Rowena Miller;
   4. Sharni Gust and Sam Gust; and
   5. Julie Powell and Evan Zammit.
3. The application for joinder of these persons is strenuously opposed by Tony Davidson and David Davidson ('applicants').
4. The proceeding concerns an application for the amendment of Planning Permit PA1611 ('permit') issued by the Hepburn Shire Council ('council') on 24 October 2017. The permit allows for the:

Aerobic composting of non prescribed organic waste - less than 100 tonnes per month from offsite - including shredded green waste. Compost to be used in worm farming, with surplus vermicast sold by retail - farm gate sales, internet/phone sales and through farmers' markets.

1. The permit is subject to 26 conditions including such conditions from Goulburn Murray Water, Central Highlands Water and the Environment Protection Authority.
2. This proceeding is brought under s 87 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) ('PE Act') and seeks to amend the permit by amending what the permit allows to:

Aerobic composting of non-prescribed organic waste from offsite - including waste categories approved for receipt under the Environment Protection Act 2017 and shredded green waste.

1. Further, the application seeks an amendment to condition 3 so that its final form would be:

The use must operate in accordance with the requirements of all approvals issued by the Environment Protection Authority from time to time. Except in accordance with a development licence, the volume of stored waste on the land associated with the use must not exceed 5,000m3 at any time after 30 June 2026, except with the approval of the EPA.

1. The applicants also seek to delete condition 5 which states:

The operator must keep and maintain compliance records showing the monthly loads received and provide a copy to the Responsible Authority upon request.

1. Other conditions are also sought to be amended.
2. The applicants say the amendments to the permit are to 'harmonise' the registrations under the Environment Protection Act 2017 (Vic) ('EP Act') by the Environment Protection Authority ('EPA'). The prescribed permission activities permitted under EPA Registration Numbers R000303585 and R000300465 are A13c (Waste and resource recovery - small). This is subject to several conditions including acceptable forms of waste.
3. The applicants have also informed me that there are proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria ('SCV') concerning the land and, that they have given an undertaking to the SCV inter alia to:

reduce the volume of stored waste on the Premises to below 5,000 cubic metres by 30 June 2026 or any later date approved by the EPA or ordered by the Court.

1. Following notice of the application to amend the permit, VCAT has received several statements of grounds with the persons set out earlier seeking to be joined as a party to the proceeding.
2. Section 60 of the VCAT Act provides:

Joinder of parties

(1) The Tribunal may order that a person be joined as a party to a proceeding if the Tribunal considers that -

(a) the person ought to be bound by, or have the benefit of, an order of the Tribunal in the proceeding; or

(b) the person's interests are affected by the proceeding; or

(c) for any other reason it is desirable that the person be joined as a party.

(2) The Tribunal may make an order under subsection (1) on its own initiative or on the application of any person.

1. The applicants say that the statements of grounds of the persons seeking joinder are too broad and focus on issues that are not relevant to the amendment of the permit including compliance with the current permit. Further, the applicants submit that issues regarding alleged non-compliance with the permit can be ventilated at the hearing of the application for enforcement order brought by council.[1]
2. Whilst there is some force in that submission, I do not accept the applicants' submission as a reason to refuse the joinder requests. Further, I do not accept the applicants' submission that simply because the amendments to the permit seek to 'harmonise' the registrations under the EP Act these persons should not be joined.
3. Firstly, I note that the planning regime and the environment regime are directed at different outcomes and sometimes 'harmony' is not necessarily essential or necessary between the two regimes, notwithstanding that it might by desirable. This is apparent from the different outcomes sought in the objectives of the PE Act and EP Act. To that end, the extent of harmonisation between the legislative regimes is a complex matter and one for ultimate debate at any final hearing. It is not a matter that should dominate consideration of a request to be joined as a party to a proceeding noting, I accept it is a relevant matter to the exercise of that discretion.
4. The applicants rely on Icecorp Pty Ltd v Boroondara CC[2] (Icecorp) for the application of s 90(2) of the PE Act. In Icecorp, VCAT was considering the extent of notice to be given of an application to amend a permit under s 87A of the PE Act. At paragraph 9 VCAT stated:
   1. The position of owners and occupiers is to be contrasted with other persons which the Tribunal has discretion to hear from under section 90(2) if the Tribunal considers they may have a material interest in the outcome of the request. The Council submitted that adjoining land owners and occupiers should be notified and provided a right to be hearing in respect of the request on the basis of their material interest. However, as I have explained, there is no longer a planning basis for requiring visitor car parking spaces to be provided on the land which is the subject of the Permit. There is therefore no planning basis for any person to object to the proposed amendment to the Permit to changes these spaces from visitor to general car parking spaces. For this reason, I do not consider adjoining land owners or occupiers, or any other person to have a material interest in the outcome of the proposed amendment to the permit. I have therefore determined that no notice of the application or opportunity to be heard need be provided to other persons under section 90(2).
5. However, the important factual consideration in Icecorp is that the amendment to the permit in that case included the deletion of a condition requiring visitor spaces in circumstances where the relevant planning scheme had changed and visitor spaces were no longer required. As VCAT explained, there was 'no longer a planning basis for requiring the visitor car parking spaces'. The facts and circumstances in this proceeding are very different to those in Icecorp.
6. Each of the persons seeking joinder reside in reasonable proximity to the land in this proceeding and given the nature of the use allowed by the permit and the amendments sought to that permit, these persons have a material interest in the outcome of the request to amend the permit. In addition, given this proximity and the nature of the operations, the interests of the persons seeking joinder may be affected by the request to amend the permit.
7. Accordingly, I will join each of these persons as respondents to the proceeding.
8. However, I do accept the submission of the applicants as to the breadth of the statement of grounds of the persons seeking joinder. The application to amend the permit is confined to what the permit allows, the conditions that are sought to be amended, deleted or introduced and not to matters about the alleged non-compliances or whether the permit should have been granted at all. The grounds relied upon by each of these persons must be confined to the amendments sought to the permit and must not include reference to alleged non-compliance or changes to the form of undertaking given to the SCV or matters that are not directly related to the amendments sought to the permit.
9. Thus, I will require each of the respondents to provide updated statements of grounds that are confined to the amendment of the permit as sought in this application. If a statement of grounds is not amended by a respondent, the applicants may seek a further practice day hearing to have the statements of grounds struck out in part or in their entirety.
10. I will require amended statements of grounds to be provided after the compulsory conference so that it can proceed without delay on 15 December 2025.
11. I do not accept the joinder of these persons will substantially impact the ability for the matter to be settled as between the applicants and the council. There are occasions where a council may refuse to settle a proceeding because of the influence of other parties but conversely there are proceedings where the council plays an integral role at facilitating an agreement or negotiations between parties. Whilst early in this proceeding council may have indicated that it did not oppose the amendments to the permit, it appears to me that is not necessarily the case at the present time.
12. Lastly, I reject the applicants' submissions that if I joined the respondents the hearing could not proceeding because there would be an impact on the length of the hearing including evidence that may be called. At the practice day hearing, I asked each of the persons seeking joinder the following two questions:
    • how long they would take to present their case? and
    • how many witness they intended to call if any?
13. Their responses indicated that an additional hour would be required and that one person may call a witness. At present two days have been allocated for the hearing with council indicating it will require two hours and the applicants indicating they will require three hours and that they do not intend to call any witnesses.[3] Given the responses of the parties and the persons seeking joinder, on the material before me, I am satisfied the submissions of the persons seeking joinder can be readily accommodated within the hearing as scheduled.

Information for all parties is available at the Tribunal's website www.vcat.vic.gov.au

For information about what happens after you make your application, visit

www.vcat.vic.gov.au/afterapplyplanning

For information about responding to an application visit www.vcat.vic.gov.au/respondplanning

If you are not able to access the website, contact the Tribunal on 1300 01 8228 Monday to Friday 9.00am to 4.30pm to request a paper copy.

To find out about the Tribunal's support services such as interpreters, disability support and security, visit www.vcat.vic.gov.au/support

A compulsory conference is a private meeting between the parties to the proceeding.

With the assistance of a Tribunal member the parties can explore options to reach an agreement on all or some of the matters in dispute. The parties should come with an open mind and flexibility in considering options that could resolve the case.

Unless all parties agree, evidence of anything said or done in the course of a compulsory conference (including any document provided to the Tribunal for the purpose of the compulsory conference) is not admissible in any hearing before the Tribunal in the proceeding.

More information about compulsory conferences is available on the Tribunal's website at www.vcat.vic.gov.au and in VCAT Practice Note PNVCAT4 - Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

If you are a party, you must attend the compulsory conference in person or by a representative who has written permission to settle the proceeding on your behalf. If you do not attend, the matter may be resolved in your absence and you may be struck out as a party. If all the parties present at the compulsory conference agree, the Tribunal may make a final order or make other orders that may affect you in an adverse way.

The Tribunal may make any of the following orders under the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998:

• If you are the applicant, your application may be dismissed or struck out.
• If you are not the applicant, you may be struck out as a party. This means that you can take no further part in the proceeding, including the hearing.
• The matter may also be settled, approving the proposal with or without changes.
• You may be ordered to pay the costs of the other parties in certain circumstances.

Only parties to the proceeding may attend a compulsory conference.

A person is a 'party' to the proceeding if the person:

• lodged an objection to the planning application
• has given a completed Statement of Grounds form to the Tribunal by the due date and paid the fee
• has indicated in their Statement of Grounds form that they intend to participate in the hearing

The following persons are NOT a party to a proceeding:

• a person who did not lodge an objection to the permit application
• a person who did not give their Statement of Grounds form by the due date and/or did not pay the fee
• a person who has indicated on their Statement of Grounds that they do not intend to participate in the hearing

If you are not a party to the proceeding but wish to be heard, you can attend at the start of the compulsory conference and ask the Tribunal to join you as a party to the proceeding. You will need to explain why you should be joined as a party to the proceeding. Other parties will also be given the opportunity to tell the Tribunal whether they agree or disagree about you being joined as a party. The Tribunal will then make a decision to join you as a party or not.

If you are not joined as party, you cannot take any further part in the compulsory conference and the Tribunal may make a final order or make other orders that may affect you in an adverse way.

A party who is struck out because they do not attend a compulsory conference cannot participate in any further compulsory conference or hearing.

What happens if agreement is reached at the compulsory conference?

If the parties present at a compulsory conference reach agreement, the Tribunal may make a final order to give effect to the agreement without a hearing being required. This can include allowing the proposal with or without changes.

What happens if agreement is not reached at the compulsory conference?

If parties present at the compulsory conference do not reach an agreement, a hearing date/s will be confirmed. An order will be issued by the Tribunal.

What happens if a partial agreement is reached at the compulsory conference?

If the parties reach agreement about some issues but not others, the hearing will proceed. If the parties present agree, the Tribunal may make an order that limits the issues to be considered at the hearing or specifies issues that will not be able to be considered. The Tribunal may also make further orders that restrict the ability of parties to raise any matters that were resolved at the compulsory conference.

What should you bring to the compulsory conference?

Parties should be come to the compulsory conference with a summary of their issues and solutions. This could include possible changes that could be made to the proposal in order to address your concerns or the concerns of other parties. The attached 'Summary of Issues and Solutions for a Compulsory Conference' may be used. The applicant for the permit should bring an extra copy of any relevant plans including elevations.

SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A COMPULSORY CONFERENCE**

It is suggested that each party identify key issues and potential solutions before the compulsory conference. This will help to clarify the key issues that the parties consider most important to them and possible solutions.

Most important issues in dispute from your perspective (including any legal matters) Use additional pages if required

What potential solutions would you consider? Use additional pages if required

[2] [2019] VCAT 1316.

[3] See answers to questions 28 and 29 on the application form.