NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Environment Protection Authority v Hunter Water Corporation [2016] NSWLEC 76 Hearing dates: 2 May 2016 Date of orders: 17 June 2016 Decision date: 17 June 2016 Jurisdiction: Class 5 Before: Moore J Decision: See orders at [169] Catchwords: PROSECUTION – pollution of waters – discharge of acidic substance into watercourse – discharge over four-month period PROSECUTION – pollution of waters – discharge of large volume of treated water containing chlorine – discharge effected to flush the receiving waterway of the substance subject of the first charge PROSECUTION – breach of Environment Protection Licence condition – failure to maintain an acid transfer pump – failure to maintain pump caused leakage of the substance in the first prosecution PROSECUTION – breach of Environment Protection Licence condition – failure to operate a bund drain pipe valve – bund drain pipe valve left open for a period of four months PROSECUTIONS – whether the offences charged should be regarded as one composite and related group of offences or whether two distinct instances of offending – first pollution of waters offence together with both contravention of licence condition offences constitute a single instance of continuing offending conduct – offence of pollution of waters by flushing with treated water containing chlorine is a separate and distinct offence PENALTIES – assessment of seriousness of the offending conduct PENALTIES – appropriate to have regard to aggregation and proportionality for the group of three offences – appropriate to have regard to the principle of totality when considering all four offences – discount for early plea – total indicative sentences of $600,000 appropriate – application of appropriate principles of aggregation and totality to derive penalties when coupled with the discount of 25% for the early guilty plea results in an appropriate total penalty of $187,500 PENALTIES – publication order – publication order made requiring notices to be produced in one regional and two local papers, all of which circulate in the area where the offences occurred PENALTIES – application of moneys to an environmental project – agreed project – project known as "Managing Sediment Export and Grazing on the Dungog Common Recreation Reserve" – any moneys not expended on the project to be paid into the Environmental Trust fund Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Environmental Trust Act 1998 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 Cases Cited: Camilleri's Stock Feeds Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority (1993) 32 NSWLR 683 Environment Protection Authority v Big River Group Pty Ltd [2011] NSWLEC 80 Environment Protection Authority v CSR Building Products Limited [2008] NSWLEC 224 Environment Protection Authority v Hanson Precast Pty Ltd [2008] NSWLEC 285 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia (the Ammonium Nitrate Solution Spill Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 109 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia Pty Ltd (the Ammonia Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 107 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia Pty Ltd (the Botany Mercury Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 110 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia Pty Ltd (the Hexavalent Chromium Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 106 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia Pty Ltd (the Jackhammer Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 105 Environment Protection Authority v Orica Australia Pty Ltd (the Nitric Acid Air Life Incident) [2014] NSWLEC 103 Environment Protection Authority v Straits (Hillgrove) Gold Pty Ltd [2010] NSWLEC 113; (2010) 174 LGERA 314 Environment Protection Authority v Sydney Water Corporation [2015] NSWLEC 80 Environment Protection Authority v Timber Industries Ltd [2001] NSWLEC 25 Environment Protection Authority v Waste Recycling and Processing Corporation [2006] NSWLEC 419; 148 LGERA 299 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Morrison v Defence Maritime Services Pty Ltd [2007] NSWLEC 421 Plath v Rawson [2009] NSWLEC 178; 170 LGERA 253 R v Thompson; R v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309; 49 NSWLR 383 Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14; 164 CLR 465 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Environment Protection Authority (Prosecutor) Hunter Water Corporation (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr N Allan, solicitor (Prosecutor) Mr J Johnson, barrister (Defendant)
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