‘Lawfare’ in the oil and gas industry
Xavier T. McMahon A B and Jake D. Williams AA Clayton Utz, Level 28, Riparian Plaza, 71 Eagle Street, Brisbane, Qld 4000, Australia.
B Corresponding author. Email: xmcmahon@claytonutz.com
The APPEA Journal 59(2) 651-653 https://doi.org/10.1071/AJ18251
Accepted: 24 March 2019 Published: 17 June 2019
Abstract
There is a growing concern within the resources industry about activists’ use of the legal system to disrupt and delay major projects. Currently, referred to by many as ‘lawfare’, the tactic is not new. However, recent challenges to high profile cases, such as the Adani Carmichael Coal Project, has brought renewed focus to the tactics being used by activists to further their agendas, and a perception at least that the risk to the industry is ever increasing. This paper looks at trends and novel developments in national and international environmental law, and considers what implications this may have for the development of oil and gas projects in Australia.
Keywords: activism, activist, challenge, delay, development, disrupt, environment, law, litigation, petroleum, project, resource.
Xavier McMahon is a specialist environmental lawyer from Clayton Utz. Xavier is the go-to environmental lawyer for several oil and gas and mining companies, having acted on many of Australia’s highest-profile and legally complex projects. Xavier has first-hand experience defending third-party challenges to resource projects, having acted recently in the largest mining-lease objection proceedings in Australian mining history, followed by landmark judicial review proceedings in the Supreme Court of Queensland, which were successful in setting aside unfavourable Land Court recommendations. |
Jake Williams is a lawyer in the Clayton Utz environment and planning team in Brisbane. With a passion for environmental and planning law, Jake has been involved in several high-profile and complex energy and resource, urban-development and infrastructure projects in Queensland for both the private and public sector. Jake primarily focuses on approval strategies for delivering major projects, environmental-incident management and compliance, environment and planning litigation and the environment and planning aspects of energy and resource transactions. Jake maintains a thorough understanding and knowledge of emerging trends and legal issues facing proponents of resource projects, particularly CSG, in Queensland. |
References
ABC (2017). Adani: Indian miner referred to consumer watchdog over 'misleading' employment claims, Robertson, J. 6 December 2017. Available at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-06/adani-jobs-accc-legal-case-chris-mccoomb/9226560 [verified 5 March 2019].Abrahams & Anor v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (2017). Notice of filing and concise statement, filed by Earth Justice Australia on behalf of applicant, 8 August 2017 in the Federal Court of Australia, Victoria Registry, Number VID879/2017. Available at https://www.envirojustice.org.au/sites/default/files/files/170807%20Concise%20Statement%20(as%20filed).pdf [verified 5 March 2019].
Armando Ferrão Carvalho & Ors v The European Parliament and the Council (2018). Case T-330/18, application dated 23 May 2018.
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) (2011). Green marketing and the Australian consumer law. Commonwealth of Australia. Available at https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Green%20marketing%20and%20the%20ACL.pdf [verified 15 April 2019].
Brandis, G. (2015). Transcript of interview with Peter Van Olsen: Sky News: 16 August 2015. Parliament of Australia, August 2015. Available at https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22media%2Fpressrel%2F4018557%22;src1=sm1 [verified 5 March 2019].
Cano Pecharroman, L. (2018). Rights of nature: rivers that can stand in Court. Resources 7, 13–26.
| Rights of nature: rivers that can stand in Court.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clark, C. (2016). The politics of public interest environmental litigation: lawfare in Australia. Australian Environmental Review 31, 258–262.
European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (2010). European Convention on Human Rights. European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe. Available at https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=basictexts&c= [verified 15 April 2019].
Gloucester Resources Limited v Minister for Planning (2019) NSWLEC 7.
Juliana & Ors v United States of America (2015). Case 6:15-cv-01517-TC, filed on 12 August 2015.
O’Donnell, E. L., and Talbot-Jones, J. (2018). Creating legal rights for rivers: lessons from Australia, New Zealand and India. Ecology and Society 23, 7.
| Creating legal rights for rivers: lessons from Australia, New Zealand and India.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pepper, R. (2017). Climate change litigation: a comparison between current Australian and international jurisprudence. The Judicial Review 13, 329–344.
The State of Rhode Island v Chevron Corp. & Ors. (2018). (PC-2018-4716) complaint filed 2 July 2018.
The State of the Netherlands v Urgenda Foundation (2018) 200.178.245/01, 9 October 2018.
Thomson v Minister for Climate Change Issues (2018). 2 NZLR 160.
Urgenda Foundation v the State of the Netherlands (2015). C/09/456689/HA ZA 13-1396, 24 June 2015.
Wild, D. (2016). ‘Section 487 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act: How Activists Use Red Tape to Stop Development and Jobs.’ (Institute of Public Affairs.)
