Munkara v Santos NA Barossa Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 1421

Munkara v Santos NA Barossa Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 1421

The applicant has standing and the Court has jurisdiction to consider an application for interlocutory injunction to restrain pipeline works pending trial, as the Regulations confer enforceable obligations and rights upon a relevant person such as Mr Munkara. While serious issues exist as to whether there are significant new environmental or cultural heritage impacts requiring a revised plan, the balance of convenience warrants an injunction restraining works only in the pipeline area south of KP86 pending resolution at trial, given evidentiary strength as to cultural significance and tangible heritage is greater there, and commercial prejudice to the respondent would be excessive if...

Parties
Applicant: Simon Munkara; Respondent: Santos NA Barossa Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Post Interim Injunction, Determination of Ongoing Interlocutory Relief Pending Final Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted in part
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Standing, Jurisdiction Under S 39 B Judiciary Act, Environmental Regulation, Cultural Heritage Protection
Practice and Procedure Administrative Law Environmental Law Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Law Interlocutory Injunctions Standing Jurisdiction Under S 39 B Judiciary Act Environmental Regulation +1 more

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Simon Munkara

Applicant

Santos NA Barossa Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Post Interim Injunction, Determination of Ongoing Interlocutory Relief Pending Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has jurisdiction and the applicant has standing to seek interlocutory injunctive relief under s 39B(1A)(c) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) and the Regulations; Whether Santos is obliged to submit a revised environment plan under reg 17(6) of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Environment) Regulations 2009 (Cth); Whether any such obligation is enforceable by injunction at the suit of Mr Munkara; Proper construction and application of regulations concerning environmental impacts and cultural heritage; Balance of convenience for injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant has standing and the Court has jurisdiction to consider an application for interlocutory injunction to restrain pipeline works pending trial, as the Regulations confer enforceable obligations and rights upon a relevant person such as Mr Munkara. While serious issues exist as to whether there are significant new environmental or cultural heritage impacts requiring a revised plan, the balance of convenience warrants an injunction restraining works only in the pipeline area south of KP86 pending resolution at trial, given evidentiary strength as to cultural significance and tangible heritage is greater there, and commercial prejudice to the respondent would be excessive if...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted in part

Orders

  • Order and injunction made 2 November 2023 (as varied 13 November 2023) is revoked.
  • Respondent restrained from undertaking pipeline activities south of KP86 on the pipeline route per the Pipeline EP, coordinates specified.