McGerty v Borg [1991] NSWLEC 41 (11 April 1991) [1991] NSWLEC 2

McGerty v Borg [1991] NSWLEC 41 (11 April 1991) [1991] NSWLEC 2

The primary facts, including the Defendant's ownership and operation of a large piggery, the observed flow of piggery effluent from his property towards and into waters, the nature and chemical analysis of the effluent, and the absence of any reasonable alternative source, proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant placed or caused to be placed piggery effluent, a pollutant, in a position on his property where it descended or fell into the waters of Reedy Creek. The Defendant was therefore guilty of the offence charged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 1991
Procedural Posture
Prosecution for Offence Against S.16 of the Clean Waters Act 1970 / Defended Hearing; Judgment on Guilt
Outcome
Defendant found guilty as charged.
Legal Topics
['water Pollution' 'clean Waters Act 1970' 'deemed Pollution' 'defective Summons' 'circumstantial Evidence']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Law'] ['water Pollution' 'clean Waters Act 1970' 'deemed Pollution' 'defective Summons' 'circumstantial Evidence']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Prosecution for Offence Against S.16 of the Clean Waters Act 1970 / Defended Hearing; Judgment on Guilt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the summons was incurably defective because it failed to specify the waters alleged to be polluted or the time, place and manner of the Defendant's acts or omissions." 'Whether the Prosecution established a case to answer linking the Defendant to the alleged act of pollution.' 'Whether the Defendant placed, or caused to be placed, piggery effluent in a position where it descended or fell into waters and whether that effluent was a pollutant.' "Whether the proven facts excluded reasonable hypotheses consistent with the Defendant's innocence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The primary facts, including the Defendant's ownership and operation of a large piggery, the observed flow of piggery effluent from his property towards and into waters, the nature and chemical analysis of the effluent, and the absence of any reasonable alternative source, proved beyond reasonable doubt that the Defendant placed or caused to be placed piggery effluent, a pollutant, in a position on his property where it descended or fell into the waters of Reedy Creek. The Defendant was therefore guilty of the offence charged.

Court Disposition

Defendant found guilty as charged.

Orders

  • ['Prosecutor ordered to provide further particulars of the charge.' 'Defendant found guilty as charged.']