Environment Protection Authority v Zoya Investments Pty Ltd [2022] NSWLEC 149

Land and Environment Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Environment Protection Authority v Zoya Investments Pty Ltd [2022] NSWLEC 149 Hearing dates: 15 November 2022 Date of orders: 16 December 2022 Decision date: 16 December 2022 Jurisdiction: Class 5 Before: Moore J Decision: See orders at [188] Catchwords: SENTENCE - failure of Defendant to comply with Management Direction given pursuant to the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997 (CLM Act) - failure to comply for 352 days - compliance triggered by commencement of prosecution - plea of guilty - plea not entered on earliest occasion - was Defendant responsible for the contamination - Defendant responsible for contamination so higher maximum penalty attracted - maximum available penalty for the primary offending conduct $1 million - appropriate starting penalty of $200,000 - additional daily penalty of $66,000 available to be imposed - wilful failure to comply with Management Direction under CLM Act for lengthy period warrants imposition of a daily penalty ‑ daily penalty of $500 appropriate - daily penalty totals $176,000 - total starting penalty $376,000 GUILTY PLEA - discount to be given for late entry of guilty plea - 10% discount appropriate - penalties of $180,000 and $158,400 after discounts for guilty pleas TOTALITY AND ACCUMULATION - consideration of appropriateness of total penalty - total penalty appropriate to be moderated ‑ total daily penalty adjusted to $140,000 ‑ total penalties imposed of $320,000 COSTS - appropriate to order Defendant to pay Prosecutor's costs - Defendant ordered to pay Prosecutor's costs as agreed or assessed MOIETY - Prosecutor seeks order for payment of moiety (50%) of the penalty to it - payment of a moiety appropriate - Defendant ordered to pay Prosecutor 50% of each of the penalties imposed Legislation Cited: Contaminated Land Management Act 1997, ss 14, 44, 95B and 97 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, ss 3A, 21A and 22 Criminal Procedure Act 1986, ss 257B and 257G Fines Act 1996, s 122 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, s 250 Western Australian Criminal Code, ss 391 and 393 Cases Cited: Axer Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority (1993) 113 LGERA 357 Budvalt Pty Ltd v Grant Barnes, Chief Regulatory Officer, Natural Resources Access Regulator [2022] NSWCCA 9 Camilleri's Stock Feeds Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority (1993) 32 NSWLR 683 Chief Executive, Office of Environment and Heritage v Ausgrid (2013) 199 LGERA 1; [2013] NSWLEC 51 Chief Executive of the Office of Environment and Heritage v Bombala Investments Pty Ltd (2013) 199 LGERA 236; [2013] NSWLEC 185 Environment Protection Authority v Australian Waste Recyclers 1 Pty Ltd [2005] NSWLEC 739 Environment Protection Authority v Barnes (2006) NSWCCA 246 Environment Protection Authority v Timber Industries Ltd [2001] NSWLEC 25 Environment Protection Authority v Unomedical Pty Limited (No 4) [2011] NSWLEC 131 Environment Protection Authority v Waste Recycling and Processing Company (2006) 148 LGERA 299; [2006] NSWLEC 419 Hoare v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 348; [1989] HCA 33 Markarian v R (2005) 229 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Mill v Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 Mohindra v R [2020] NSWCCA 340 Pearce v The Queen (1988) 194 CLR 610 Plath v Rawson (2009) 170 LGERA 253; [2009] NSWLEC 178 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 383 The Queen v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383; [1981] HCA 31 Veen v The Queen (1979) 143 CLR 458; [1979] HCA 7 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14 Walden v Hensler (1987)163 CLR 561; [1987] HCA 54 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Environment Protection Authority (Prosecutor) Zoya Investments Pty Ltd (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr P English, barrister (Prosecutor) Mr S Young, barrister (Defendant)