Environment Protection Authority v Brazel (No 3) [2002] NSWLEC 120

Reported Decision : 121 LGERA 156

Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

CITATION : Environment Protection Authority v Brazel (No 3) [2002] NSWLEC 120 PROSECUTOR Environment Protection Authority PARTIES : DEFENDANT Donald William Brazel FILE NUMBER(S) : 50018 of 2001 CORAM: Talbot J KEY ISSUES: Prosecution :- finding of offence proved but not proceed to conviction LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, s 10, s 10(1)(a), s 10(3), s 10(3)(d) Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 s 120, s 241 CASES CITED: Thorneloe v Filipowski (2001) 52 NSWLR 60 DATES OF HEARING: 14/06/2002 EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 06/14/2002

PROSECUTOR Mr D J Jordan (Barrister) SOLICITORS Environment Protection Authority LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: DEFENDANT Mr P G Maident (Barrister) SOLICITORS Robson & Oliver

JUDGMENT:

IN THE LAND AND Matter No. 50018 of 2001 ENVIRONMENT COURT Coram: Talbot J OF NEW SOUTH WALES Decision Date: 14 June 2002

Environment Protection Authority Prosecutor v Donald William Brazel Defendant

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. HIS HONOUR: The prosecutor has proved an offence that the defendant did pollute waters, contrary to the provisions of s 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 ("the PEO Act"), within the extended definition in that Act, in that liquid of a prescribed description, namely pesticide, was placed in a position where it fell, descended or percolated into the street gutter and a culvert under a road and a drain beyond.