Land and Environment Court of New South Wales CITATION : Hannam & Anderson [1998] NSWLEC 81 PROSECTOR Hannam PARTIES : DEFENDANT Anderson FILE NUMBER(S) : 50086 of 1997 CORAM: Sheahan J KEY ISSUES: :- LEGISLATION CITED: Land & Environment Court Act Soil Conservation Act 1938 CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/15/1998 LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES: JUDGMENT: Defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of contravening s 21C of the Soil Conservation Act 1938 as amended. It is a strict liability offence, the facts underlying which have been proven beyond reasonable doubt, but need not be repeated here. The defendant has explained his conduct and he called his son to give confirmatory evidence as to the circumstances in which they as family farmers cleared vegetation on protected lands. I do not need to repeat what has been placed before the Court, as the only dispute between the parties is if any court proceedings are necessary at all. I am satisfied neither the defendant nor his family knew the status of the land, and I am satisfied they were seeking to improve that land and rid it of vermin when they undertook the clearing. I am also satisfied that they made relevant enquiries about possible problems with SEPP 46 before beginning their work, that much of the subject timber was felled before the Anderson family acquired the property, and that the clearing work was carried out in an environmentally sensitive way in the sense that no soil was gouged and older growth was left undisturbed. In these circumstances, given Mr Anderson's justifiable pride in his clean record, his early plea of guilty soon after the charge was laid two years after the event, his ready co-operation with the relevant authorities, and his willingness to submit by consent to comprehensive orders in respect of remediation of the site, by management and revegetation, this is clearly an appropriate case for the Court to extend the benefit of section 556A of the Crimes Act. Accordingly, I refrain from entering a conviction on the charge on conditions that the remediation works are carried out and the prosecutor's just and reasonable costs are paid. Exhibit E sets out an estimate of the Prosecutor's costs, and Exhibit D sets out some consent orders in respect of costs and remediation work. I am prepared to make Orders 1, 3 and 4 of those orders but, having heard Mr Anderson's submissions in respect of his financial position particularly after a lengthy period of drought, I amend Order 2 as presented to allow 3 years from the date of agreement as to quantum of costs or its assessment pursuant to s 52 of the Land & Environment Court Act and the regulations thereunder. DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.