Environment Council of Central Queensland Inc v Minister for the Environment and Water (No 2)

Environment Council of Central Queensland Inc initiated litigation against the Minister for the Environment and Water, contesting the approval of coal mine extensions. The dispute involved the interpretation and application of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) concerning the preservation of endangered species and the regulation of development. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the legal issues arising from the appeals, focusing on the costs associated with the litigation.

The court had to decide whether to order the parties to bear their own costs, given the public interest nature of the litigation. The court considered the principles guiding the exercise of the costs discretion, including the compensatory principle and the possibility of special circumstances warranting departure from the general rule. The court also reviewed previous cases where public interest litigation was involved, such as South-West Forest Defence Foundation v Department of Conservation and Land Management (No 2) and Oshlack v Richmond River Council. These cases informed the court's understanding of how to approach costs in environmental litigation, particularly when charitable organisations are involved.

The court concluded that the litigation was conducted efficiently and responsibly, without being vexatious or hopeless. It recognised the importance of organisations like the appellant in enforcing environmental laws for the public benefit. However, the court decided not to order costs in these specific appeals, considering the interests of justice and the primary judge’s costs orders. The court found that each party should bear its own costs of the appeals, ensuring that the respondents were not entirely uncompensated for their trial-related expenses. This decision aligns with the compensatory principle and acknowledges the significant issues raised by the appeals concerning the EPBC Act.

ORDERS:
1. There be no order as to the costs of the appeals in VID 885 of 2023 and VID 886 of 2023.