Environment Protection Authority V Shell Co of Australia Ltd (No 3) [1999] NSWLEC 288

Environment Protection Authority V Shell Co of Australia Ltd (No 3) [1999] NSWLEC 288

The statutory presumption in s 12(3) of the EOP Act operates so that the date endorsed on the summons is presumptively the date on which the EPA first had evidence of the offence. The defendant has the legal burden, on the balance of probabilities, to establish an earlier date to defeat the presumption. On the evidence, the defendant did not do so, and proceedings were commenced within time.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Environmental Offence Proceedings / Judgment on Strike Out Notice of Motion
Outcome
Defendant's Notice of Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['statutory Limitation Period' 'onus of Proof' 'statutory Presumption']

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 Proceedings / Judgment on Strike Out Notice of Motion

  1. 1 ['Whether proceedings were commenced within the statutory limitation period under Environmental Offences and Penalties Act 1989 s 12(3)' 'Who bears the onus of establishing the date evidence of the offence came to the attention of the EPA']

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory presumption in s 12(3) of the EOP Act operates so that the date endorsed on the summons is presumptively the date on which the EPA first had evidence of the offence. The defendant has the legal burden, on the balance of probabilities, to establish an earlier date to defeat the presumption. On the evidence, the defendant did not do so, and proceedings were commenced within time.

Court Disposition

Defendant's Notice of Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The Defendant's Notice of Motion for summary dismissal is dismissed."]