NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
CITATION : Environment Protection Authority v Simplot Australia Pty Ltd [2001] NSWLEC 40 PROSECUTOR: Environment Protection Authority PARTIES : DEFENDANT: Simplot Australia Pty Ltd FILE NUMBER(S) : 50049; 50050; 50051 of 2000 CORAM: Bignold J KEY ISSUES: Environmental Offences :- polluting waters - plea of guilty—mitigating factors - Appropriate sentence LEGISLATION CITED: Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, s 120(1) CASES CITED: EPA v Devro-Teepak Pty Ltd (2000) NSWLEC 275; R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 DATES OF HEARING: 7 March 2001 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/07/2001
PROSECUTOR: Mr D Galpin, Barrister SOLICITORS Environment Protection Authority LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: DEFENDANT: Mr B J Preston, SC SOLICITORS Andersen Legal
JUDGMENT:
IN THE LAND AND Matter No. 50049, 50050, 50051 of 2000 ENVIRONMENT COURT OF Coram: Bignold J. NEW SOUTH WALES 7 March 2001
ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AUTHORITY
Prosecutor
v
SIMPLOT AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
Defendant
JUDGMENT
Bignold J:
A. INTRODUCTION
1. The Defendant has pleaded guilty to two separate charges of an offence against the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, s 120(1), (PEO Act) in that between 1 and 19 August 1999 (the first charge) and on 4 September 1999 (the second charge) at Bathurst, it polluted waters. By consent, the charges were heard together.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate