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

Powelliphanta Augustus Incorporated (formerly Save Happy Valley Coalition Incorporated), Appellant, and Solid Energy New Zealand Limited, First Respondent, and Buller District Council, Second Respondent, and West Coast Regional Council, Third Respondent

País/Territorio
Nueva Zelandia
Tipo de la corte
Otros
Fecha
Apr 30, 2007
Fuente
UNEP, InforMEA
Nombre del tribunal
High Court of New Zealand
Juez
Panckhurst
Número de referencia
CIV-2006-409-002993
Idioma
Inglés
Materia
Cuestiones jurídicas, Recursos minerales
Palabra clave
Licencia minera Procedimientos judiciales/procedimientos administrativos
Resumen
Solid Energy New Zealand mined the Mt Augustus ridgeline pursuant to a coal mining licence granted to its predecessor under the Coal Mines Act 1979. The appellant sought to prevent Solid Energy from continuing to mine the ridgeline of Mt Augustus in a manner which would endanger the Powelliphanta Augustus snails, some of which were threatened with extinction, and their habitat. The court had to decide whether the enforcement powers under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) were available against the holder of a coal mining licence. The lower Environment Court had previously held that it had no jurisdiction to invoke the enforcement powers under the RMA against Solid Energy because the coal mining license had been granted to the predecessor under the Coal Mines Act 1979, and because of a transitional provision in the Crown Minerals Act 1991. In 1991 both the Crown Minerals Act 1991 and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) came into force, with the result that an entirely new regime for mining minerals in New Zealand became effective. However, s107 of the Crown Minerals Act provided for “existing privileges to continue”. Coal mining licences were within the definition of “existing privileges”. The court interpreted s107 Crown Minerals Act in the context of the Mining Act 1971, the Coal Mines Act 1979 and the RMA. In conclusion, it agreed with the Environment Court that it had no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the Appellant.
Texto completo
jdo.justice.govt.nz

Referencias

Cita

Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica

Tratado | Multilateral | Rio de Janeiro |

Palabra clave: Transferencia de tecnología, Biotecnología, Especies exóticas, Uso sostenible, Solución de controversias, Cultivos/praderas, Derechos tradicionales/derechos consuetudinarios, Recopilación de datos/informes, Ordenación/conservación, Subvención/incentivo, Educación, Institución, EIA, Financiamiento, Investigación, Zona protegida, Conservación ex-situ, Protección del hábitat, Responsabilidad/indemnización, Recursos genéticos, Monitoreo, Política/planificación, Acceso a la biodiversidad y distribución de beneficios, Biodiversidad, Conservación del ecosistema

Fuente: IUCN (ID: TRE-001148)

Cita

Resource Management Act 1991 (No. 69 of 1991).

Legislación | Nueva Zelandia | 1991 (2022)

Palabra clave: Legislación básica, Efluente de aguas residuales/vertido, Contaminación del suelo/calidad, Ordenación de áreas costeras, Zona protegida, Zona de conservación de aguas, Aguas continentales, Manejo de tierras, Autorización/permiso, Aguas superficiales, Aguas subterráneas, EIA, Protección del medio ambiente, Cambio climático, Uso sostenible, Acuicultura, Marinocultura, Manejo de recursos hídricos, Aguas termales y medicinales, Instalaciones, Control de la contaminación, Desarrollo sostenible, Captación de agua, Fertilizantes/nutrientes, Contaminación de las aguas dulces, Biodiversidad, Derechos tradicionales/derechos consuetudinarios, Conservación del ecosistema, Fauna silvestre, Flora silvestre

Fuente: FAO, FAOLEX