20th December 2012

Its back to the Supreme Court AGAIN with fresh legal action to overturn environmental approvals given for the Browse Project because of conflicts of interest within the West Australian Environmental Protection Agency board.

The Wilderness Society of Western Australia has joined forces with traditional owner, Richard Hunter, to launch an action in the Supreme Court, seeking a judicial review of decisions taken by the EPA and the State Government to allow construction of the Browse gas processing facilities at James Price Point.

If successful, the action could force the Browse joint venture partners to restart environmental approvals for the James Price Point development.

ALSO the WA Supreme Court has been asked to overturn the state government’s second attempt at compulsory acquisition of the site and rule the $1.5bn compensation deal negotiated with the Kimberley Land Council invalid.

The action alleges the government facilitated an abuse of the federal court process in its dealings over James Price Point.

The Supreme Court action, on behalf of traditional law boss, Phillip Roe, claims the KLC had been placed under “improper pressure” by the WA government when it threatened the KLC and the applicant of the native title claim over the area if the group proceeded with a court action to split the claim.

The KLC was acting following a vote of Goolarabooloo and Jabirr Jabirr people that the native title claim be split.

The new action alleges the state government’s actions had been an abuse of the acquisition processes as well as the Federal Court’s claim process.

A summons has been lodged in the WA Supreme court against the State of Western Australia, WA Minister for Land, WA Land Corporation, Broome Port Authority, the Kimberley Land Council and others.

In a statement, Mr Barnett said: “The agreement reached by a vote of traditional owners was in accordance with the Commonwealth Native Title process under the supervision of the Federal Court. The state government is confident it has acted in accordance with this process and that the second Notice of Intention to Take was valid,” Mr Barnett said.