Wildlife Whitsunday Case

This case study provides an example of litigation in the Federal Court of Australia concerning greenhouse gas emissions from coal mines in Queensland.

The case involved a judicial review application by a North Queensland conservation group, Wildlife Whitsunday, against two decisions under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) involving two large coal mines.

A summary of the case and the need for law reform that is evidenced by it is available here.

A summary of the case and its implications by Allens Arthur Robinson (solicitors for one of the coal mines in the case) is also available here.

Key documents in the case are:

• Referrals of Isaac Plains Coal Mine (EPBC 2005/2070) and Sonoma Coal Mine (EPBC 2005/2080).

• Location maps of Isaac Plains Coal Mine and Sonoma Coal Mine.

• Submissions by Wildlife Whitsunday to the Minister that the Isaac Plains Coal Mine and the Sonoma Coal Mine are controlled actions.

• Decisions that the Isaac Plains Coal Mine and the Sonoma Coal Mine are not controlled actions.

• Statement of reasons that the Isaac Plains Coal Mine and the Sonoma Coal Mine are not controlled actions.

• Application for Order of Review as originally filed (version 1 of 3) .

• Applicant's Notice to Admit Facts and respondent's Notice of Disputing Facts.

• The decision-maker's affidavit explaining his reasoning for why the mines' greenhouse gas emissions did not trigger the EPBC Act.

• Application for an Order of Review as amended in response to decision-maker's affidavit (version 3 of 3).

• Applicant's outline of argument and supplementary outline.

• Judgment of Dowsett J dismissing the application: WPSQ Proserpine / Whitsunday Inc v Minister for the Environment and Heritage [2006] FCA 736.

Page photos: Newcrest Coal Mine, Qld, and Stanwell Power Station, Qld. Source: Qld EPA, 1999.