Ecolex Logo
The gateway to
environmental law
Search results » Jurisprudence

Roe v Director General, Department of Environment and Conservation (WA)

Country/Territory
Australia
Type of court
National - higher court
Date
Mar 15, 2011
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Court name
Supreme Court of Western Australia
Seat of court
Perth
Judge
Martin C. J.; Buss; Murphy J. J. A.
Reference number
[2011] WASCA 57
Language
English
Subject
Land & soil
Abstract

The appeal considered whether the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Environment of Western Australia’s decision to grant a land clearing permit was valid. The permit allowed the respondent to clear up to 25 hectares of land.

The Environmental Protection Act 1986 of Western Australia (EPA) requires ‘significant proposals’ to be referred and assessed. The EPA defines ‘significant proposal’ as a proposal likely, if implemented, to have a significant effect on the environment.

The applicant argued that the permit was not valid as the permit was granted prior to an environmental assessment as required by the EPA. Despite this, the Court held that the grant of the permit was valid.

Central to the Courts finding was that the particular proposal was not one that would be likely to have a significant effect on the environment. As such, the proposal was not considered a ‘significant proposal’ that required assessment. Consequently, the permit’s validity was upheld.

(Contribution:  Case provided by Charley Xu from the Queensland University of Technology)

 

Full text
jade.io