Environment Protection Authority v Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd (No 2)

Case [2013] NSWLEC 151


Land and Environment Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Environment Protection Authority v Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] NSWLEC 151
Hearing dates:16 September 2013
Decision date: 16 September 2013
Jurisdiction:Class 5
Before: Biscoe J
Decision:

Orders 3 and 4 made on 16 August 2013 are amended as follows:

(1) Order 3 - substitute "21" with "45";

(2) Order 4 - substitute "35" with "45".

Catchwords: SENTENCING for environmental offence - extension of time for compliance with publication order and consequential order.
Legislation Cited: Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 s120
Cases Cited: Environment Protection Authority v Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd [2013] NSWLEC 134
Category:Consequential orders
Parties: Environment Protection Authority (Prosecutor)
Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd (Defendant)
Representation: COUNSEL:
D Zanello, solicitor (Prosecutor)
C Ireland (Defendant)
SOLICITORS:
Office of Environment and Heritage (Prosecutor)
Minter Ellison (Defendant)
File Number(s):50043/13

EXTEMPORE Judgment

  1. On 16 August 2013 I sentenced the defendant for an offence against s 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997: Environment Protection Authority v Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd [2013] NSWLEC 134. Orders 3 and 4 were in the following terms:

(3) Pursuant to s 250(1)(a) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the Defendant, within 21 days of this order, is to place a notice in the first five pages of the following publications:
(a) Singleton Argus newspaper;
(b) Newcastle Herald newspaper; and
(c) Australian Mining monthly magazine,
at a quarter of a page in size in the form of Annexure A.
(4) Within 35 days of the date of these orders, the Defendant is to provide to the Prosecutor with a complete copy of the page of the publications in which the notice appears.
  1. The defendant, with the consent of the prosecutor, now seeks amendment of order 3(c) by substituting "21" with "45" and amendment of order 4 by substituting "35" with "45". The reason is that the defendant cannot comply with those orders, despite having acted promptly, because the publisher of the Australian Mining Monthly Magazine has advised that, due to the monthly publication cycle, the notice cannot be published until the October edition of that magazine on or about 26 September 2013. In my view, this is a cogent reason for amending the orders as sought by the defendant.

  1. By consent, orders 3 and 4 made on 16 August 2013 are amended as follows:

(1)   Order 3 - substitute "21" with "45";

(2)   Order 4 - substitute "35" with "45".

Details
AGLC
Environment Protection Authority v Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] NSWLEC 151
Case
[2013] NSWLEC 151
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, Environment Protection Authority (EPA) sued Coal and Allied Operations Pty Ltd (Coal and Allied) over alleged breaches of environmental laws. The EPA claimed that Coal and Allied's coal mining activities had resulted in significant environmental harm, including dust pollution and damage to local waterways. The dispute centred on the interpretation of environmental regulations and whether Coal and Allied had adequately complied with its obligations under these laws.

The central legal issues before the court were whether Coal and Allied had breached specific provisions of the environmental legislation and, if so, what the appropriate remedy should be. The court had to consider the extent of the environmental harm caused by Coal and Allied's activities and whether the company had taken sufficient measures to mitigate such harm. Additionally, the court needed to determine the precise scope of Coal and Allied's obligations under the relevant environmental laws.

The court found that Coal and Allied had indeed breached certain provisions of the environmental legislation, primarily due to inadequate measures to control dust emissions and protect local waterways. The court emphasised the seriousness of the breaches and the need for effective remediation. In light of these findings, the court ordered modifications to Coal and Allied's operational practices to ensure compliance with environmental standards. Specifically, the court amended Orders 3 and 4, substituting "45" for "21" and "35" respectively, reflecting changes in the operational parameters to address the identified breaches.

Orders

Orders of the court

Orders 3 and 4 made on 16 August 2013 are amended as follows:

(1) Order 3 - substitute "21" with "45";

(2) Order 4 - substitute "35" with "45".

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.