Environment Protection Authority v Rail Infrastructure Corporation

Reported Decision: 119 LGERA 409

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:

Environment Protection Authority v Rail Infrastructure Corporation [2002] NSWLEC 37

PARTIES:

PROSECUTOR
Environment Protection Authority

DEFENDANT
Rail Infrastructure Corporation

FILE NUMBER(S):

50103; 50104; 50105 of 2001

CORAM:

Talbot J

KEY ISSUES:

Prosecution :- cause waters to be polluted - mitigation

LEGISLATION CITED:

Land and Environment Court Act 1979
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 s 120, s 120(1), s 120(2), s 241(1), s 241(1)(a), s 241(1)(b), s 241(1)(c)
Rail Safety Act 1993
Transport Administration Act 1998'
Land and Environment Court Regulation 2000

CASES CITED:

Thorneloe v Filipowski (2001) 116 LGERA 56

DATES OF HEARING:

04/03/2002; 05/03/2002

DATE OF JUDGMENT:

03/22/2002

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

PROSECUTOR
Mr T G Howard (Barrister)
SOLICITORS
Environment Protection Authority

DEFENDANT
Mr B J Preston SC
SOLICITORS
Baker & McKenzie

JUDGMENT:

IN THE LAND AND Matter No. 50103-5 of 2001
ENVIRONMENT COURT Coram: Talbot J
OF NEW SOUTH WALES Decision Date: 22 March 2002

Environment Protection Authority
Prosecutor

v
Rail Infrastructure Corporation

Defendant

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT


The charges

1. The defendant has entered a plea of guilty to each of three charges that it committed an offence against s 120(2) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (“the PEO Act”).

2. Section 120(2) provides that a person must not cause any waters to be polluted. Each of the charges relate to events that took place on 2 June 2000.

3. The allegation contained in each summons is that the defendant, without adequate pre-spray assessment arranged for, gave instructions in relation to and inadequately supervised Pancorp Australia Pty Ltd (“Pancorp”) causing Pancorp to place a liquid mixture of pesticides on or along the Blayney to Cowra railway line corridor so that it washed into or was likely to be washed into an identified dam on three separate properties. It is alleged that the liquid mixture of pesticides contained Simazine, Oust (Sulfometuron-methyl), Roundup (Glyphosate) and Synetrol (emulsifiable vegetable oil).

4. In matter No 50103 of 2001 the relevant waters are particularised as the dam in Paddock No: 10 on a property, namely “Swan Ponds” owned by Anthony James Blackmore.

5. In matter No 50104 of 2001 the relevant waters are particularised as the Ram Paddock dam on a property, namely “Werribee” owned by John Bruce Rowlands.

6. In matter No 50105 of 2001 the relevant waters are particularised as the Woolshed Dam on a property, namely “Aziel Te-Ar-Maru” owned by Barbara Gladys Marsden.

Background

7. An elaborate and detailed Statement of Agreed Facts is in evidence.

8. The defendant, Rail Services Australia (“RSA”) (now called Rail Infrastructure Corporation (“RIC”)) is a statutory State owned corporation which has amongst its principle objectives, pursuant to the Transport Administration Act 1998, to be a supplier of goods and a provider of services to the rail industry. The Cowra/Blayney Line is in the Country South Region covering the rail lines in southwest New South Wales (“NSW”) south of the Lithgow to Broken Hill Line.

9. At…