J. Corkill v. Forestry Commission of New South Wales Pays/Territoire Australie Type de cour Autres Date Oct 29, 1990 Source UNEP, InforMEA Nom du tribunal Land and Environment Court of New South Wales Juge Stein Numéro de référence 40208 of 1990 Langue Anglais Sujet Forêts Mot clé Mesures de protection des forêts Essence forestière Licence/permis forestier EIA Autorisation/permis Forêts pluviales Gestion/conservation Service forestier/agents forestiers Gestion forestière/conservation des forêts Résumé The applicant sought declarations and other orders concerning the lawfulness of approvals granted by the Forestry Commission of N.S.W. to the logging or harvesting of timber and related works in an area known as North Washpool. The Commission administered the Forestry Act 1916 and was responsible for all aspects of the management of State Forests and other Crown timber lands in N.S.W. Harvesting operations were authorised by the issue of various licences and approvals under the said Act. The dispute concerned both the carrying out of roading, burning, snigging and incidental logging by the Commission, and logging by its licensees. The applicant sought interlocutory relief with respect to a harvesting plan issued by the Commission for logging in an area of land within North Washpool known as Compartment695 and having an area of 395ha. The court was of the view that from a reading of the harvesting plan as a whole, it was clear that the approval authorized logging in rainforest areas contained within Compartment695. The licenses and harvesting plans granted by the Commission to carry out logging were "approvals" and related to an "activity" within the meaning of s.110 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act (E.P.&A. Act), and any such approval had to be given in accordance with PartV thereof. The applicant submitted that any approvals that had been granted were in breach of the obligations imposed by the provisions of s.111 and s.112 E.P.&A. Act. The court emphasized that the duty imposed by s.111 and s.112 was to compel a determining authority to be environmentally sensitive, and for that purpose to determine whether the proposal required investigation and assessment in the manner prescribed therein. It was alleged that the said activities were likely to significantly affect the environment but, in breach of s.112, the Commission had not obtained an environmental impact statement in respect thereof. It followed, that the Commission did not consider to the "fullest extent" reasonably practicable matters likely to affect the environment; s.111. The court was of the view that since 1982 the Commission had approved logging of rainforest areas in North Washpool in breach of the provisions of the E.P.&A.Act. It was ultimately conceded by the Commission that all rainforest areas of North Washpool were expressly excluded from areas to be logged in the 1980 environmental impact statement. Notwithstanding such express exclusion, the Commission had authorized rainforest logging within North Washpool. In the opinion of the court, the lawfulness of approvals to log rainforest areas which had been expressly excluded from the only environmental impact statement prepared for the area was a serious matter for determination at the final hearing. It did not follow that, merely because there were important issues to be tried on the final hearing of this matter, an applicant was automatically entitled to interlocutory orders. In the exercise of the wide discretion vested in the Court, consideration had also to be given to the circumstances of the case and the balance of convenience. An undertaking as to damages, if ultimately unsuccessful, was not offered by the applicant. However such undertaking was not essential in the view of the court in a public interest matter such as this, which concerned alleged breaches of public law by a statutory authority. The court accepted that a total cessation of logging activities in the area prior to final hearing would probably cause some hardship and inconvenience to both the Commission and its licensees. However, such inconvenience and hardship, if any, had to be weighed against the possible environmental damage if the activity was allowed to continue until further order. In conclusion, the court was persuaded that, until final order, logging activities and related works in the North Washpool area, and Compartment695 in particular, should be restrained. Texte intégral 129.html