The application for rezoning was made before the commencement of the Local Government (Planning and Environment) Act 1990 ("the Act"), the transitional provisions of which provide that such an application is to be dealt with as if that Act had not commenced. However, the appellant submits that the appeal to this Court is not a proceeding dealing with that application but rather with a decision of the Planning and Environment Court given after the commencement of the Act. The respondents did not contend to the contrary and indeed nothing turns on this question. The appeal to this Court from the Planning and Environment Court under the Act is "on the ground of error or mistake in law on the part of the Court or that the Court had no jurisdiction to make the determination or exceeded its jurisdiction in making the determination": s. 7.4(3). However, appeals to this Court were provided for under the predecessor of that section, s. 28(3) of The City of Brisbane Town Planning Act of 1964, in identical terms. Accordingly, in the absence of argument we are prepared to assume that this appeal is under s. 7.4(3) rather than its predecessor.

There is no question of absence or excess of jurisdiction in the Planning and Environment Court in making its determination, the subject of this appeal. However, it was contended by the respondents that there was no error or mistake in law on the part of the court and that consequently this appeal was not competent. The error or mistake in law which the appellant says the court made was one of construction of the strategic plan which is part of the Town Plan of the Shire of Caboolture.