Corowa and Anor v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation and Anor [2001] NSWLEC 226

Corowa and Anor v Water Administration Ministerial Corporation and Anor [2001] NSWLEC 226

The water licence application should be refused. The application was invalid by force of the Water Act 1912, s 22BA(5), and, in any event, the merits required refusal because there was no present or likely need for a clean water supply to the Timbarra Gold Mine, while pumping from Nelsons Creek involved real and substantial potential harm to threatened frog species and their habitat. Balancing the second Respondent's need for water against the environmental consequences weighed heavily and decisively in favour of protecting Nelsons Creek.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Class 3 Proceedings for a Public Inquiry Under the Water Act 1912 Concerning a Water Licence Application / Final Judgment and Report to the Ministerial Corporation After Public Inquiry
Outcome
The second Respondent's water licence application should be refused; exhibits may be returned and costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['application for Water Licence' 'objections to Water Licence' 'threatened Species and Habitat' 'ecologically Sustainable Development' 'environmental Impact Assessment' 'validity of Water Entitlement Application' 'mine Water Supply']
['water Law' 'environmental Law' 'planning and Environment' 'natural Resources' 'native Title and Aboriginal Heritage'] ['application for Water Licence' 'objections to Water Licence' 'threatened Species and Habitat' 'ecologically Sustainable Development' 'environmental Impact Assessment' 'validity of Water Entitlement Application' 'mine Water Supply']

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

Class 3 Proceedings for a Public Inquiry Under the Water Act 1912 Concerning a Water Licence Application / Final Judgment and Report to the Ministerial Corporation After Public Inquiry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether it was desirable in the public interest under the Water Act 1912, s 11(5) to grant the second Respondent's water licence application." 'Whether the second Respondent had a present or likely need for water from Nelsons Creek for the Timbarra Gold Mine.' 'Whether pumping water from Nelsons Creek would have real and substantial potential adverse impacts on threatened frog species and their habitat.' 'Whether the water licence application was invalid by force of the Water Act 1912, s 22BA(5).' 'Whether the second Respondent was eligible to apply for the water licence by having obtained the right to occupy the site of the water works.' 'Whether other issues raised by the Applicants, including pollution, misleading flow data, and Aboriginal heritage assessment, were substantiated or carried weight.']

Ratio Decidendi

The water licence application should be refused. The application was invalid by force of the Water Act 1912, s 22BA(5), and, in any event, the merits required refusal because there was no present or likely need for a clean water supply to the Timbarra Gold Mine, while pumping from Nelsons Creek involved real and substantial potential harm to threatened frog species and their habitat. Balancing the second Respondent's need for water against the environmental consequences weighed heavily and decisively in favour of protecting Nelsons Creek.

Court Disposition

The second Respondent's water licence application should be refused; exhibits may be returned and costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ["The second Respondent's water licence application should be refused." "These reasons for judgment contain the Court's report to the Ministerial Corporation pursuant to the Water Act 1912, s 11(5)." 'The exhibits may be returned.' 'The question of costs is reserved.']