Environment Protection Authority v HTT Huntley Heritage Pty Ltd [2003] NSWLEC 142

Environment Protection Authority v HTT Huntley Heritage Pty Ltd [2003] NSWLEC 142

The defendant deliberately and culpably contravened condition L5.3 by accepting approximately 37,000 tonnes of construction and demolition waste that was not permitted by its licence, and the contravention was likely to cause environmental harm through lead leaching. Having regard to the seriousness of the deliberate breach of licence and public trust, the statutory sentencing factors, absence of prior environmental convictions, and costs exposure, a fine of $60,000 and a daily penalty of $3,000 for each of 19 flagrant days was appropriate. Removal orders under s 245 were refused because they would preclude other lawful rehabilitation options and were uncertain or potentially impossible...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Environmental Offence Prosecution for Contravention of an Environment Protection Licence Condition / Conviction and Penalty After the Court Found Contravention of Condition L5.3
Outcome
Defendant convicted; total monetary penalty of $117,000 imposed; publication order and costs order made; s 245 removal orders refused.
Legal Topics
['breach of Environment Protection Licence Conditions' 'continuing Environmental Offence' 'mitigation and Penalty' 'restoration and Prevention Order' 'publication Order']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Sentencing'] ['breach of Environment Protection Licence Conditions' 'continuing Environmental Offence' 'mitigation and Penalty' 'restoration and Prevention Order' 'publication Order']

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

Environmental Offence Prosecution for Contravention of an Environment Protection Licence Condition / Conviction and Penalty After the Court Found Contravention of Condition L5.3

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant's contravention of condition L5.3 was deliberate and culpable or based on a genuine belief that construction and demolition material could be accepted under the licence." 'What penalty, including any daily penalty, should be imposed for the continuing contravention of the environment protection licence.' 'Whether the offence caused or was likely to cause environmental harm, including from lead or asbestos in the Collex stockpile.' 'Whether orders should be made under s 245 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 requiring removal of the waste.' 'Whether an order should be made under s 250 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 requiring publication of the offence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant deliberately and culpably contravened condition L5.3 by accepting approximately 37,000 tonnes of construction and demolition waste that was not permitted by its licence, and the contravention was likely to cause environmental harm through lead leaching. Having regard to the seriousness of the deliberate breach of licence and public trust, the statutory sentencing factors, absence of prior environmental convictions, and costs exposure, a fine of $60,000 and a daily penalty of $3,000 for each of 19 flagrant days was appropriate. Removal orders under s 245 were refused because they would preclude other lawful rehabilitation options and were uncertain or potentially impossible...

Court Disposition

Defendant convicted; total monetary penalty of $117,000 imposed; publication order and costs order made; s 245 removal orders refused.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is convicted of the offence with which it has been charged.' 'The defendant is to pay a fine of $60,000 and a further penalty of $3,000 for each of the 19 days from and including 11 August 2001 to 29 August 2001 during which the offence continued, making a total sum of $117,000, payable to the...