Inquiry into the Orroral Valley Fire - [2025] ACTCD 4

CORONER’S COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Matter Title:	Inquiry into the Orroral Valley Fire
Citation:	[2025] ACTCD 4
Hearing Date:	14 November 2022, 6 June 2023 - 9 June 2023
Decision Date:	13 June 2025
Before:	Chief Coroner Walker
Findings:	[36]-39], [189]-[198], [226]-[227], [238]-[246]
Catchwords:	CORONIAL LAW – bushfire – scope of inquiry – cause and origin of the fire – circumstances in which the fire happened – Defence Assistance to the Civil Community – interagency communications and operations – delay in reporting a bushfire – risk management planning and processes – reporting obligations – matters of public safety
Legislation Cited:	Coroners Act 1997 (ACT) ss 18, 52, 57 Emergencies Act 2004 (ACT)
Case Cited:	R v Doogan; Ex parte Lucas-Smith [2005] ACTSC 74
Representation:	Counsel Assisting the Coroner K Nomchong SC (instructed by S Richards) Counsel for the Commonwealth of Australia M Fordham SC and S McCarthy (instructed by Clayton Utz) Counsel for the Australian Capital Territory M Jones SC and K Weir (instructed by ACT Government Solicitor) Counsel for the Affected Residents P Tierney (instructed by Ken Cush & Associates)
File Number:	CF 1 of 2021

CHIEF CORONER WALKER:

1․The summer of 2019/2020 saw a particularly catastrophic bushfire season in the south-east of Australia. Bushfires were raging between Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory and the South Coast of New South Wales.
2․During the season, the Australian Defence Force (“ADF”) provided aid to civil authorities upon request in a number of locations and capacities, through the Defence Assistance to the Civil Community Initiative (“DACC”).
3․27 January 2020 in the ACT was, according to the Bureau of Meteorology, a hot day with gusting winds and very high fire danger.
4․On that day, in the course of providing assistance, a fire was ignited (“the incident”) by the searchlight of an Australian Regular Army helicopter, a Multi-Role Helicopter 90 Taipan (“MRH-90”). This occurred at the head of the Orroral Valley in the Namadgi National Park in the ACT. It came to be known as the Orroral Valley Fire (“OVF”).
5․The OVF burned for over five weeks. Thankfully, no human life was lost. There was, however, very significant loss of domestic and wild flora and fauna, wide environmental damage, damage to Indigenous and other sites of cultural significance and significant property damage to landholdings. Affected persons suffered emotionally and financially.

Procedural History

6․The question of an inquiry into the fire arose as the result of a request made to me as Chief Coroner on 29 March 2021, on behalf of the residents of Bumbalong in New South Wales. Those residents had suffered property damage from the fire, which commenced in the Orroral Valley, but in NSW became known as the Clear Range Fire. The correspondence caused me to consider the circumstances in which the OVF had begun.
7․Section 18 of the Coroners Act 1997 (ACT) (“the Act”) provides:
18Coroner’s jurisdiction in relation to fires
(2)A coroner may (at the request of the owner or occupier of destroyed or damaged property or…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Inquiry into the Orroral Valley Fire

Details

AGLC: Inquiry into the Orroral Valley Fire [2025] ACTCD 4
Case: [2025] ACTCD 4
Decision Date: 13 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Orroral Valley Fire (OVF) was ignited on 27 January 2020 by the searchlight of an Australian Regular Army helicopter, a Multi-Role Helicopter 90 Taipan (MRH-90) during the course of providing aid to civil authorities. The fire burned for over five weeks, resulting in very significant loss of flora and fauna, wide environmental damage, damage to sites of cultural significance and significant property damage. The Chief Coroner was satisfied that an own-motion inquiry was warranted into the fire. The inquiry considered issues including the cause of the ignition of the fire, the location and time of ignition, the nature and scope of the operations of the MRH-90 during the activities, the nature and scope of interagency communications between the ADF and the ACT Emergency Services Agency, the nature and scope of any reporting undertaken by ADF personnel, the circumstances surrounding the time and the means by which the ESA became aware of the fire, and the effect of any delay in the reporting of the ignition of the fire to the ESA. The Chief Coroner found that the fire was ignited by the MRH-90’s searchlight at 1338 hours on 27 January 2020. The fire was reported to the ESA by Mr Russell Mealy at 1419 hours, 35 minutes after the fire was ignited. The Chief Coroner found that the failure of anyone on board the MRH-90 to report the OVF at the earliest opportunity was an error of judgment, and that the failure to advise any relevant authority of the ignition and location of the fire at the earliest possible opportunity is properly characterised as an error of judgment. The Chief Coroner found that the delay in reporting the OVF had no significant impact on the response to it, and that the spread of the fire was exponential because of the location of its ignition and difficulty responding quickly to that location. The Chief Coroner made recommendations relating to risk assessments, communication and systemic issues.

Orders