Apportioning remediation responsibility - how should the WA Contaminated Sites Committee do it? *

Australia - August 2 2012
The decision in Coffey could have major implications for deciding who is responsible for site contamination.

Co-authors: Susannah Hill.

---

Nothing improper in WA Planning Minister's intervention in controversial resource development *

Australia - July 19 2012
Industry will need to evaluate the need for and timing of high-level government intervention, its impact on environmental assessment processes and public reaction.

---

Contaminated sites: pollution without lawful authority? *

Australia - July 5 2012
The Court confirmed that lease covenants for the operation of sites are likely to be very relevant to identifying who's assumed the responsibility of preventing pollution.

---

WA land-owners might soon have clearer idea of their responsibilities for contaminated land *

Australia - June 7 2012
The WA Supreme Court will consider the threshold question of whether a "person caused or contributed to, that contamination by an act that was done without lawful authority".

---

WA Court of Appeal dismisses LNG precinct challenge *

Australia - July 25 2011
Two related decisions of the Court of Appeal in Western Australia clarify the boundaries between "strategic proposals" and "significant proposals" under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 (WA) (EP Act).

Co-authors: Rebecca Shanahan.

---