Land and Environment Court of New South Wales

Yeah, look, this was a pretty narrow and technical decision from the High Court.

But what they've done is they've referred it back to the Land and Environment Court.

And the company has been gearing up their workforce and gearing up their mind to increase their production.

And we are going to introduce legislation to protect those 400 workers at its current operation rate.

And they found that the Independent Planning Commission in New South Wales that approved it was meant to have considered what's called scope three emissions, which are the carbon emissions that are caused when the exported coal is burnt overseas.

And so the New South Wales Court of Appeal found that that approval was actually invalid subject to a review from a lower court called the Land and Environment Court.

So they didn't find out right that it was invalid, but they found that it was invalid subject to this review.

And that was in July last year.

And over that time, the mine just kept expanding.

Now, all of that would be okay if the High Court had ruled in the Bayern's favour and found that the expansion was totally fine and valid.

But because they lost, and the High Court found that their mining approval was invalid because planning authorities didn't look at those overseas emissions properly, that meant that the mine had to go back to that lower court, the Land and Environment Court, and toss it out again.

So they do have an existing approval, an old approval that no one's contesting that does allow them to extract 12.5 million tonnes per year and keep operating until 2032.

And to think about what that could mean for those young children with this proposal successful, I'm not lying when I say it keeps me up at night.

On Monday, hundreds of people gathered on the Beaconsfield Road as the New South Wales Land and Environment Court began hearing an appeal by developer Repoly.

It's been a long haul for the community and I think that the turnout today is really indicative that this is not the right site.

The community knows that, the council knows that and we just need the project to stop.

were everything.

I remember some of the first Land and Environment Court matters that we had.

We represented ourselves.

Did you? Yes.

So you know how to do it.

Getting stuff through council, you ask anyone in Australia, it's become onerous, man.

I had a house that was in five years and they put it straight into Land and Environment Court.

To me, it was like the council didn't want to deal with it.

The Local Government Amendment Labour Hire Bill 2026 would require councils to be satisfied that workers will receive at least the same remuneration, including overtime and penalty rates, before entering or amending a labour hire contract.

It would also allow proceedings in the Land and Environment Court to prevent or remedy breaches.

The bill is now before Parliament.

Dubbo Regional Council is seeking ten million dollars in damages in the New South Wales Supreme Court over smart water meters it says failed and reduced its revenue.

But we do know that the Environmental Defenders Office is involved because they say as much on their website.

They say that on behalf of a group of Hunter Valley residents who live near the mine, we've applied for a judicial review of the decision in the Land and Environment Court.

Now, the Environmental Defender's Office from other work we've done received the vast majority of their operational budget from private citizens and independent funds, including from charitable foundations like the Graham Wood Foundation, the MacKinnon Family Foundation, the Lenko Family Foundation, and the Purves, P-U-R-V-E-S, Purves or Purves Environment Fund.

They receive international grants from organizations such as the European Climate Foundation, the Swiss Oak Foundation, and the American Earth Justice Group.