Hobart man Darko Krajinovic loses appeal against $225,000 fine

A HOBART man who illegally demolished his heritage-listed home to build four townhouses has lost an appeal to have his $225,000 fine reduced.

Darko Krajinovic has lost his appeal against a $225,000 fine for ilegally knocking down a heritage-listed house.

A MAN who illegally demolished his heritage-listed home to build four townhouses has lost an appeal to have his $225,000 fine reduced.

Justice Robert Pearce on Friday dismissed Darko Krajinovic’s motion in the Supreme Court in Hobart, saying the penalty was not “manifestly excessive”.

Mr Krajinovic, 33, used an excavator to destroy his 1885 Mount Stuart home without a Hobart City Council planning permit on February 26 last year.

FURY AT ILLEGAL DEMOLITION OF HERITAGE-ZONED HOME

The unauthorised demolition caused asbestos fibres to be released into the air.

He also cut down two significant trees, an Irish yew tree and bay tree, without making an application to the council.

Krajinovic pleaded guilty to nine offences relating to the incident.

During the original trial, the Hobart Magistrates Court heard Krajinovic and his partner purchased 55 Mount Stuart Rd in September 2016 for $445,000.

They were told a Historic Heritage Code applied to the property but Krajinovic said he signed the contract without looking at the relevant conditions.

Sentencing Magistrate Simon Cooper described Krajinovic’s actions as a “flagrant and deliberate breach of the law”.

DEMOLITION MAN COPS SIX-FIGURE FINE

“You released asbestos dust, or dust that actually contained asbestos, into the air, it was an actual threat to your neighbours,” he said.

“The penalty imposed must be of such magnitude that it will serve to deter anyone else inclined to flouting, with utter contempt as you did, the planning laws.

“It should be clear from what I have said that this offending is, in my view, as bad an example imaginable of its type.”

In rejecting Krajinovic’s appeal, Justice Pearce said the $225,000 fine was only 62 per cent of the maximum penalty which could have been imposed.

“I see no error in the Magistrate’s statement that the applicant displayed an utter disregard for both the law and rights of his neighbours,” he said.

“I have no difficulty in concluding that imposition of heavy financial penalties in cases such as this one will cause others weighing up the potential risks and benefits of development, to think twice before acting in breach of the planning laws.”

Hobart City Council general manager Nick Heath said he welcomed the decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the penalty imposed.