Environment Protection Authority v Signium Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 126

Environment Protection Authority v Signium Pty Ltd [2018] NSWLEC 126

Signium Pty Ltd pleaded guilty to breaches of its environmental licence (section 64(1), POEO Act) and providing false or misleading information (section 66(2), POEO Act). The imposition of an Environmental Services Order (ESO) under s 250(1)(c) of the POEO Act was justified by its broader public benefit. Despite the considerable cost of the ESO ($147,000+GST), additional monetary penalties were appropriate, based on the seriousness of the offences, principles of general and specific deterrence, and proportionality, after application of a 25% discount for early pleas. The fines were ordered to be paid to the Environmental Trust Fund, providing public environmental benefit beyond the works...

Parties
Prosecutor: Environment Protection Authority; Defendant: Signium Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Sentence
Outcome
Defendant convicted on two charges; monetary penalties and environmental services order imposed; two additional charges dismissed.
Legal Topics
Breach of Environment Protection Licence, Provision of False and Misleading Information, Sentencing Principles, Environmental Services Order, Penalty Assessment
Environmental Law Criminal Law Breach of Environment Protection Licence Provision of False and Misleading Information Sentencing Principles Environmental Services Order Penalty Assessment

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Environment Protection Authority

Prosecutor

Signium Pty Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Signium Pty Ltd breached condition O1.1 of its Environment Protection Licence by incompetent management of effluent and waste at its piggery
  2. 2 Whether Signium Pty Ltd provided false or misleading information in its Statement of Compliance (condition R1.1)
  3. 3 Appropriate statutory basis for imposing an Environmental Services Order

Ratio Decidendi

Signium Pty Ltd pleaded guilty to breaches of its environmental licence (section 64(1), POEO Act) and providing false or misleading information (section 66(2), POEO Act). The imposition of an Environmental Services Order (ESO) under s 250(1)(c) of the POEO Act was justified by its broader public benefit. Despite the considerable cost of the ESO ($147,000+GST), additional monetary penalties were appropriate, based on the seriousness of the offences, principles of general and specific deterrence, and proportionality, after application of a 25% discount for early pleas. The fines were ordered to be paid to the Environmental Trust Fund, providing public environmental benefit beyond the works...

Court Disposition

Defendant convicted on two charges; monetary penalties and environmental services order imposed; two additional charges dismissed.

Orders

  • Signium Pty Ltd convicted of offence against s 64(1) POEO Act (Matter 229320/2017); to pay $12,000 to Environmental Trust Fund.
  • Signium Pty Ltd convicted of offence against s 66(2) POEO Act (Matter 229323/2017); to pay $15,000 to Environmental Trust Fund.