IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/envlaw/v36y2024i1p125-132..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Living Wonders case: A Backwards Step in Australian Climate Litigation on Coal Mines

Author

Listed:
  • Jacqueline Peel

Abstract

As one of the world’s largest exporters of coal and gas, Australia’s domestic regulation of fossil fuels plays an important part in global greenhouse gas emission reduction efforts. This analysis examines the Australian Federal Court’s Living Wonders decision—the latest judicial review challenge to coal mines based on Australia’s federal environmental law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).1 This legislation has significant flaws as a tool for regulating the climate impacts of fossil fuel projects, which the Living Wonders decision emphasises. The Federal Court found no legal error in the Environment Minister’s reasoning that large export-oriented coal mines will produce ‘no net increase’ in global emissions and/or have emissions which are too ‘small’ to warrant detailed assessment under the EPBC Act. The Living Wonders judgment delivers a blow to hopes for progressive, climate-friendly interpretation of Australia’s federal law in coal litigation and strengthens arguments for law reform.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacqueline Peel, 2024. "The Living Wonders case: A Backwards Step in Australian Climate Litigation on Coal Mines," Journal of Environmental Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 125-132.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:envlaw:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:125-132.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jel/eqae002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:envlaw:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:125-132.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jel .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.