Ecolex Logo
El portal del
derecho ambiental
Resultados de la búsqueda » Jurisprudencia

Friends of Mallacoota Inc v Minister of Planning & Minister for Environment and Climate Change [2010] VSC 222

País/Territorio
Australia
Tipo de la corte
Nacional - corte superior
Fecha
May 27, 2010
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
Victorian Supreme Court
Sede de la corte
Melbourne
Juez
Osborn
Número de referencia
[2010] VSC 222
Idioma
Inglés
Materia
Mar, Cuestiones jurídicas
Resumen

This case considered the nature of the Minister’s discretion in determining what weight to give an Environment Effects Statement when considering a proposed development. The facts of this case were as follows; a new boat ramp was proposed by a local Council near the Mallacoota Inlet in Victoria, Australia. This was due to inadequacies of the current ramp for the operation of boats and also due to its proximity to a public swimming beach. The Council sought permission under s 38 of the Coastal Management Act 1995 (Vic) to construct this new ramp and in doing so remove native vegetation. In response, the Minister for Planning required that an Environment Effects Statement was created to ascertain the effect that this would have on the local environment. The Statement was created and suggested the rejection of the proposed boat ramp. Instead, the Minister refused to accept the arguments made by the Environment Effects Statement due to the safety risks posed by the current ramp.

The Friends of Mallacoota sought to have this decision reviewed on three bases. Firstly, that it was a failure to exercise the jurisdiction of the Environment Effects Act 1978 (Vic). Secondly, that the Minister erred by taking into account ‘irrelevant’ factors. Thirdly, there has been a failure of procedural fairness.

The Court rejected these arguments. It was held that the Minister may accept and reject and Environment Effects Statement at their discretion. Giving weight to particular factors is part of that discretion. Additionally, it was held that ‘social effects (including economic effects)’ are not necessarily excluded from being ‘environmental effects’ for the purposes of this Act.

(Contribution:  Case provided by Friedrich Kuepper from the Queensland University of Technology)

Texto completo
Friends of Mallacoota v Minister.pdf
222.html