People for the Plains Incorporated v Santos NSW (Eastern)

[2015] NSWSC 1792

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	People for the Plains Incorporated v Santos NSW (Eastern) [2015] NSWSC 1792
Hearing dates:	30 November 2015
Decision date:	30 November 2015
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Adamson J
Decision:	Pursuant to s 149B(2) of the Civil Procedure Act these proceedings be transferred to the Land and Environment Court and heard together with related Land and Environment Court proceedings number 15/41031
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – judicial review proceedings – related proceedings in Land and Environment Court - whether appropriate to transfer judicial review proceedings to Land and Environment Court – transfer order made
Legislation Cited:	Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 149B Land and Environment Court Act 1979 (NSW), ss 20, 21C Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (NSW)
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	People for the Plains Incorporated (INC 130 14 43) (Plaintiff) Santos NSW (Eastern) Pty Limited (ACN 009 321 662) (First Defendant) Santos NSW Pty Limited (ACN 094 269 780) (Second Defendant) Secretary, NSW Department of Industry (Third Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: N Hammond (Plaintiff) B Mostafa (First and Second Defendants) P Herzfeld (Third Defendant)     Solicitors: EDO NSW (Plaintiff) Ashurst Australia (First and Second Defendants)
File Number(s):	2015/339756

Judgment (Ex TEMPORE – REVISED)

Introduction

1. The People for the Plains Incorporated, the plaintiff in these proceedings, by notice of motion filed in Court today seeks an order pursuant to s 149B(2) of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) that the proceedings be transferred to the Land and Environment Court and heard together with related Land and Environment Court proceedings number 15/41031.

Circumstances of the two proceedings

2. These proceedings were commenced by the filing of a summons on 18 November 2015 in this Court to challenge, under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), an approval granted by the delegate of the Secretary of the NSW Department of Industry under the Petroleum (Onshore) Act 1991 (NSW) in relation to a treatment plant for waste from coal seam gas in the Narrabri area.

3. Ms Hammond, who appears on behalf of the plaintiff, read without objection an affidavit of Brendan Dobbie of 27 November 2015, to which is annexed a copy of proceedings also commenced by the plaintiff by summons filed on 18 November 2015 in the Land and Environment Court proceedings (the Land and Environment Court proceedings). The three respondents to the Land and Environment Court proceedings are the same parties as the three defendants to the Supreme Court proceedings, being: Santos NSW (Eastern) Pty Ltd (the first defendant/respondent); Santos NSW Pty Ltd (the second defendant/respondent); and the Secretary of the New South Wales Department of Industry (the third defendant/respondent).

4. In the Land and Environment Court proceedings, the plaintiff challenges the approval given by the third respondent under Class 4 of the Land and Environment Court's jurisdiction under the Land and Environment Court Act1979 (NSW), s 20(1).

Consideration

5. Having regard to the terms of s 20 of the Land and Environment Court Act, which confers Class 4 (judicial review) jurisdiction on the Land and Environment Court, it appears that the Land and Environment Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and dispose of matters under the Petroleum (Onshore) Act within its jurisdiction with respect to Class 4 matters. Ms Hammond has drawn my attention to s 21C of the Land and Environment Court Act, which provides for Class 8 matters, which are “mining matters”, which include proceedings under the Petroleum (Onshore) Act. However, as such proceedings under that Act are proceedings which provide merits review of decisions made under that Act, I accept that the proceedings commenced in this Court for judicial review do not fall within the jurisdiction conferred by the Land and Environment Court Act.

6. It appears to me highly desirable that these two proceedings be determined in a single Court. It would be, in my view, inimical to the interests of justice were parallel proceedings to be conducted in different courts to determine, by judicial review, challenges to separate, but related , decisions.

7. Accordingly, this matter is suitable for transfer. I note that the transfer is not opposed by Mr Mostafa, who appears on behalf of the first and second defendants, or Mr Herzfeld, who appears on behalf of the third defendant.

8. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to make an order pursuant to s 149B(2) of the Civil Procedure Act that these proceedings be transferred to the Land and Environment Court and heard together with related Land and Environment Court proceedings number 15/41031.

Order

9. I make the following order:

1. Pursuant to s 149B(2) of the Civil Procedure Act these proceedings be transferred to the Land and Environment Court and heard together with related Land and Environment Court proceedings number 15/41031.

**********

Decision last updated: 30 November 2015