Plaintiff Opposes Charges Imposed by Municipal Council
The Municipal Council imposed charges for the financing of a broad range of waste services for the local community and its members. The plaintiffs argue that such imposition is not within the power of the Council. The tribunal, in deciding whether or not the charges could be imposed relied on the Local Government Act 1989 (Vic).
Facts:
On 12 June 2018, the municipal Council declared a compulsory charge on rateable land in its municipal district, for the financial year 2018–2019 to recover costs expected to be incurred by the Council in providing waste services for its local community during that financial year.
The plaintiffs contend that ss 155(d) and 162(1)(b) of the Local Government Act 1989 (Vic) did not authorise the charge and that the power conferred by those provisions did not extend to cover all waste services provided by a Council.
The plaintiffs submit that the charge was required to be limited to the recovery of, only, the costs or anticipated costs of collecting waste, or of being prepared and willing to collect waste, from those individual properties to which the charge was to apply, together with the costs or anticipated costs of disposing of that particular waste. Their alternative contention is that even if the costs of indirect or general waste services provided to the local community as a whole could be included in the costs to be recovered, a charge of the kind referred to in ss 155(d) and 162(1)(b) could only be made applicable to those particular properties for which a direct refuse collection and disposal service was to be provided or offered by the Council.
Issue:
Whether the particular form of impost was available to the Council in the circumstances.
Applicable law:
Local Government Act 1989 (Vic) - provides for ‘annual service charge’ to be declared on rateable land for ‘the collection and disposal of refuse.' The Council had power under the Act to recover costs of the relevant kind by putting compulsory imposts on rateable land.
Analysis:
The functions of a municipal Council included ‘planning for and providing services and facilities for the local community' and ‘raising revenue to enable the Council to perform its functions'. The Council submits that ss 155(d) and 162(1)(b) authorised it to impose the Waste Service Charge for 2018–2019, because the charge was an annual service charge on rateable land; because it was for the collection and disposal of refuse; and because, for the purpose of s 162(2), it was declared on the basis of criteria ($241 per annum for each rateable property) specified by the Council in the charge. There is no requirement for an annual service charge under ss 155(d) and 162(1)(b) must be for services that at least include a waste collection and disposal service provided directly to the land of the person to be charged.
Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the Waste Service Charge could validly be imposed on rateable land in relation to which no direct refuse collection and disposal service at all was to be provided.The Court dismissed the proceeding, concluding that ss 155(d) and 162(1)(b), read in the context of the Act as a whole, provides that the power of the Council to declare a charge under those provisions was not limited in either of the ways suggested by the plaintiff.
