BP P.l.c

This matter concerned an application by BP P.l.c. (the applicant) for an order under s 1324 of the *Environmental Protection Act 1994* (Qld) (the Act) to restrain the respondent, a former employee, from contravening provisions of the Act. The applicant alleged the respondent had contravened s 436(1) of the Act by failing to comply with a notice issued under s 429 of the Act, and that there was a real risk of further contraventions. The respondent denied contravening the notice and argued that the applicant had not established a sufficient risk of future contraventions.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had satisfied the threshold for obtaining an interlocutory injunction under s 1324 of the Act. This required the applicant to demonstrate a serious question to be tried regarding the alleged contravention of the notice and a real risk of further contraventions by the respondent. The court also had to consider whether the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction.

Justice Wilson applied the principles governing interlocutory injunctions, noting that the applicant bore the onus of establishing a serious question to be tried. His Honour found that the evidence presented by the applicant did not establish a serious question to be tried regarding the respondent's alleged contravention of the s 429 notice. Consequently, the applicant failed to demonstrate a real risk of further contraventions, and the court concluded that the balance of convenience did not favour the grant of an injunction.

The application for an interlocutory injunction was dismissed.