Environment Protection Authority v Pullinger [2022] NSWLEC 143

Environment Protection Authority v Pullinger [2022] NSWLEC 143

Although the defendant's alleged failures to comply with condition 10 of the varied clean-up notice were particularised as multiple occasions, the conduct as charged in the summons constituted a single criminal enterprise rather than a series of separate offences. The summons is not bad for duplicity because the breaches were sufficiently connected in time, place, and character to be properly prosecuted in a single count under the statutory scheme.

Parties
Prosecutor: Environment Protection Authority; Defendant: Robert Leonard Pullinger
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Motion / Interlocutory (notice of Motion to Set Aside Summons for Alleged Environmental Offence)
Outcome
Notice of motion to set aside summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Offence Against a Clean Up Notice, Duplicity in Criminal Proceedings, Continuing Offence Exception, Single Criminal Enterprise Exception, Statutory Construction of Environmental Offences
Environmental Law Criminal Law Offence Against a Clean Up Notice Duplicity in Criminal Proceedings Continuing Offence Exception Single Criminal Enterprise Exception Statutory Construction of Environmental 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Environment Protection Authority

Prosecutor

Robert Leonard Pullinger

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Motion / Interlocutory (notice of Motion to Set Aside Summons for Alleged Environmental Offence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summons for failing to comply with condition 10 of a clean-up notice is bad for duplicity
  2. 2 Whether the alleged conduct constitutes a continuing offence under s 91(5) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997
  3. 3 Whether the alleged conduct constitutes a single criminal enterprise for the purpose of criminal pleading

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defendant's alleged failures to comply with condition 10 of the varied clean-up notice were particularised as multiple occasions, the conduct as charged in the summons constituted a single criminal enterprise rather than a series of separate offences. The summons is not bad for duplicity because the breaches were sufficiently connected in time, place, and character to be properly prosecuted in a single count under the statutory scheme.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion to set aside summons dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion filed on 22 March 2022 in proceedings 327090 of 2020 is dismissed.
  • Costs of the notice of motion are reserved.