Natural Resources Access Regulator v Bao Lin Pty Ltd [2022] NSWLEC 42

Natural Resources Access Regulator v Bao Lin Pty Ltd [2022] NSWLEC 42

Bao Lin Pty Ltd committed four strict liability offences under the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) by carrying out controlled activities and harming waterfront land without required approvals, causing both actual and likely environmental harm. Given the moderate range of objective seriousness, and considering mitigating factors such as guilty pleas, partial remediation, lack of prior convictions, and some demonstrated remorse, the Court imposed reduced fines for each offence, made restoration/prevention and publication orders, and awarded costs, ensuring that general and specific deterrence were met while taking account of the totality principle.

Parties
Prosecutor: Natural Resources Access Regulator; Defendant: Bao Lin Pty Ltd (ACN 162 411 681)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Sentence / Decision After Guilty Pleas and Sentence Hearing
Outcome
Convictions recorded; fines imposed; restoration/prevention and publication orders made; costs awarded to prosecutor
Legal Topics
Environmental Offences, Controlled Activities on Waterfront Land, Harm to Environment, Sentencing Principles, Restoration Orders, Strict Liability Offences
Environmental Law Criminal Law Environmental Offences Controlled Activities on Waterfront Land Harm to Environment Sentencing Principles Restoration Orders Strict Liability Offences

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natural Resources Access Regulator

Prosecutor

Bao Lin Pty Ltd (ACN 162 411 681)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Sentence / Decision After Guilty Pleas and Sentence Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for carrying out controlled activities on waterfront land without approval and for harming waterfront land under the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW)?
  2. 2 What is the extent of harm caused by the offences and what restoration and prevention orders are appropriate?
  3. 3 What is the appropriate quantum of fines and further orders to be imposed, including costs and publication orders?

Ratio Decidendi

Bao Lin Pty Ltd committed four strict liability offences under the Water Management Act 2000 (NSW) by carrying out controlled activities and harming waterfront land without required approvals, causing both actual and likely environmental harm. Given the moderate range of objective seriousness, and considering mitigating factors such as guilty pleas, partial remediation, lack of prior convictions, and some demonstrated remorse, the Court imposed reduced fines for each offence, made restoration/prevention and publication orders, and awarded costs, ensuring that general and specific deterrence were met while taking account of the totality principle.

Court Disposition

Convictions recorded; fines imposed; restoration/prevention and publication orders made; costs awarded to prosecutor

Orders

  • Conviction of Bao Lin Pty Ltd for four offences (two under s 91E, two under s 345(2) Water Management Act 2000 (NSW))
  • Fines: $64,600 (offence one), $57,000 (offence two), $64,600 (offence three), $64,600 (offence four) imposed respectively