Giralang shop fight goes to the High Court

The alliance of north Canberra businesses, which includes local IGA grocery stores backed by Supabarn, won special leave on Friday to challenge the redevelopment of the Giralang shops in the High Court.

The shops have stood derelict since the supermarket closed in 2004.

The Belconnen centre became the subject of a bitter dispute in 2011 after Planning Minister Simon Corbell used his call-in powers to approve a 1500-square-metre Woolworths supermarket, retail outlets, a cafe, restaurant and car parks.

The northside retailers launched legal action in the ACT Supreme Court, arguing Mr Corbell's decision was not consistent with the Territory Plan because it was too large, would create traffic problems and failed to take into account the economic impact on other commercially viable centres.

But Justice John Burns and then the Court of Appeal ruled that none of the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the decision as there was no evidence the increased competition would affect their profitability.

Justice Burns noted the retailers had the ability to respond commercially to emerging competition.

The retailers took the question of what constituted a "person aggrieved" to the High Court and were granted special leave to challenge the development.

The case will probably be heard in August or September.

The High Court judges will be asked to consider whether economic interests were insufficient to grant standing under the "person aggrieved" test to the High Court.

The group will argue the ACT Court of Appeal judgment should be overturned on the grounds that the law enabled a ''person aggrieved by'' or whose interests are ''adversely affected'' by the minister's decision to seek judicial review of the decision.

The local business owners believe the Court of Appeal had applied the wrong test to deny them standing.

Alliance lawyer, Alan Bradbury, of Bradley Allen Love Lawyers, said his clients were very pleased with the decision and were hopeful of victory.

Planning Minister Simon Corbell declined to comment.

The court action is the final hope the group has of preventing the development after the government declined to pursue allegations that Woolworths had used dirty tricks to gain approval.

Last year, the businesses claimed an economic impact statement, provided to the ACT Planning and Land Authority and Mr Corbell, had underestimated the economic impact of the new development on the grocery trade in surrounding suburbs.

The retailers alleged the national groceries giant had provided one set of figures to planning authorities and kept another set of numbers secret.

They alleged Mr Corbell had been ''misled'' about the impact of the development and urged him to withdraw his consent.

Woolworths and the owner of the site, Nikias Nominees, denied any misleading conduct.

But Mr Corbell declined to pursue the allegations, citing a technicality that meant he could not legally consider the documents as they had been obtained as part of a Supreme Court case against the supermarket project.