Environment Protection Authority v Steggles Foods Mt Kuring-gai Pty Ltd [2017] NSWLEC 33

Environment Protection Authority v Steggles Foods Mt Kuring-gai Pty Ltd [2017] NSWLEC 33

The prosecutor had to provide particulars identifying the human agency alleged to have contravened the licence condition because the involvement of "any person" in the s 64(1) contravention was an element of the offence, even though the offence is a status offence against the licence holder. The defendant was entitled to sufficient particulars of the factual foundation of the charge to understand the case, consider its plea, and consider any defence; the status-offence character of s 64 did not remove that obligation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Class 5 Prosecution / Notice of Motion Seeking Provision of Particulars of Charge in Addition to Those Provided in the Summons
Outcome
Defendant's Notice of Motion upheld; prosecutor ordered to provide particulars and pay the defendant's costs of the hearing on 16 March 2017.
Legal Topics
['protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 S 64(1)' 'environment Protection Licence Condition' 'particulars of Charge' 'status Offence' 'costs']
['environmental Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 S 64(1)' 'environment Protection Licence Condition' 'particulars of Charge' 'status Offence' 'costs']

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 5 Prosecution / Notice of Motion Seeking Provision of Particulars of Charge in Addition to Those Provided in the Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecutor was required to provide particulars of the identity of the "person" alleged to have contravened the environment protection licence condition under s 64(1) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.' 'Whether the existing particulars of the charge were sufficient to enable the defendant to understand the case against it and consider its plea or any statutory defence.' 'Whether the characterisation of s 64(1) as a status offence removed the need to identify the human agency involved in the alleged contravention.']

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecutor had to provide particulars identifying the human agency alleged to have contravened the licence condition because the involvement of "any person" in the s 64(1) contravention was an element of the offence, even though the offence is a status offence against the licence holder. The defendant was entitled to sufficient particulars of the factual foundation of the charge to understand the case, consider its plea, and consider any defence; the status-offence character of s 64 did not remove that obligation.

Court Disposition

Defendant's Notice of Motion upheld; prosecutor ordered to provide particulars and pay the defendant's costs of the hearing on 16 March 2017.

Orders

  • ["The Defendant's Notice of Motion filed on 6 March 2017 is upheld." 'The Prosecutor is ordered to provide the particulars of the identity of the "person" it alleges to have contravened the subject licence condition, as requested in paragraph 3 of the letter dated 23 January 2017 from Henry Davis York to the...