David Shirt’s Post

New federal environmental legislation is pending through 2024. This may impact on any person/entity involved in anything that may be inferred to have a link to anything that may be perceived as 'environmental'. This is quietly been compiled under "EPBC Act reform". Anybody working with/on/impacting environment (land,sea,air, other) may already be familiar. If already aware then you will be on the case; if this is news to you then please start with the link below; https://lnkd.in/gQHfD39A My cynicism assumes that anything solar/wind/hydro could be excluded by definition; but anything to do with reality ought to know about what is to be proposed. Would not be surprised if the Albo-show tries to force this through before the federal election to justify a 'mandate' fantasy 😎

🌳 Ready for the environmental news round up? 🌳 Claire Petricca-Riding, Keith Davidson, Jill Crawford, Stéfano Giancarlo D'Ambrosio Nuñez, Elizabeth Mutter, Lea Ash, Anna Tranter and Cody Brookes bring the run down on the most important legal updates in the environmental world. Here is the link to the full article with a summary below. 👇 https://lnkd.in/ejuYKdrN 🌍Dutch courts side with Shell in appeal, but confirm that the company has a duty to reduce emissions 🌍UK sets ambitious new greenhouse gas reduction target 🌍CoP29: Can Azerbaijan’s fossil fuel economy lead on climate ambition? 🌍New “waste crime levy” 🌍Dive in and have your say on the future of bathing waters 🌍Jo Bateman’s claim against South West Water widened to account for impact of Manchester Ship Canal judgment #environment #news #irwinmitchell

National EPA, changes to EPBC Act compliance powers and penalties, and a new Australian definition of 'nature positive' for the purposes of environmental reporting by Environment Information Australia. So much to unpack - see our update here, with special thanks to Kathryn Pacey, Melanie Debenham and Jasmine Wood

MiningWatch joined Ecojustice and West Coast Environmental Law Canada in issuing this news release to support a letter signed by a broader group of environmental assessment (EA) experts. The role of the federal government is crucial in protecting the public interest. Beyond the uncertainty created by a patchwork of inconsistent provincial requirements, the provinces are simply not equipped, or not willing, to take environmental assessment seriously. It seems clear that the industry's complaints about "regulatory certainty" are shown to be in bad faith – and really just aimed at deregulation – by the fact that they are quite happy with at least 17 different EA regimes across the country (federal, provincial, territorial, and comprehensive claims settlement areas), and silliness like 6 separate EAs and one late-in-the-day regional assessment for the road into the "Ring of Fire." https://lnkd.in/gKbstCsX

INSIGHT | Commonwealth Government announces stage 2 of the Nature Positive Plan – better for the environment, better for business EPBC Act reforms The Commonwealth Government has announced the introduction of two new bodies: Environment Protection Australia, Australia’s first independent national environmental regulator, and Environment Information Australia who will maintain Australia’s environmental data and prepare the State of the Environment Report. Piper Alderman partners Kathryn Walker and Katie Winterbourne, along with Kian Rafie, Lawyer and Jae Moffat, Law Graduate discuss the key takeaways. Read the complete article here: https://lnkd.in/gkGxhfiA #naturepositiveplan #epbcplan #environmentlaw

Ready for the environmental news round up? Claire Petricca-Riding, Keith Davidson, Jill Crawford, Stéfano Giancarlo D'Ambrosio Nuñez, Elizabeth Mutter, Benjamin Holland, and Emma Barlow bring the run down of the most important legal updates in the environmental world. Here's the full article with a summary below. 👇 https://lnkd.in/e9TEDxyQ 🌍 EU fails to reach an agreement on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) 🌍 Updates to the offence response options from the Environment Agency 🌍 East Midlands International Airport to stand trial over alleged river pollution 🌍 Southern Water is fined £330,000 by the EA for negligent dumping of raw sewage  🌍 DEFRA proposes designation of 27 new bathing water sites Also, our Environmental Insight section addresses a recent decision of the Court of Appeal providing that the Secretary of State has no duty to consider the advice from the Climate Change Committee. #irwinmitchell #Environment #Sustainability #ESG

📢 New Blog Alert! 📰 We’ve just published a follow-up to our previous article from February 23, 2024, discussing the landmark Supreme Court decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine. This pivotal change has significant implications for environmental cleanup efforts, particularly in Texas and New Mexico. 🔍 Discover how increased judicial scrutiny, regulatory uncertainty, and reduced agency expertise could impact environmental policies and cleanup projects. Check out the full blog to learn more! #EnvironmentalCleanup #ChevronDoctrine #TalonLPE #RegulatoryChanges

BREAKING CLIMATE LITIGATION NEWS: The Australian government does NOT have to consider the environmental impacts of emissions when approving coal and gas projects, the Federal Court has ruled. The Environment Council of Central Queensland, represented by Environmental Justice Australia, had challenged environment minister Tanya Plibersek's risk assessment of the Narrabri and Mount Pleasant coal mine proposals in New South Wales. The litigation stems from a series of requests submitted by the council under the Environment Protection Biodiversity and Conservation Act to reconsider 19 coal and gas proposals because of their climate risks. The latest ruling establishes a precedent that the federal government can ignore the risk such fossil fuel projects pose to protected plants, animals, and places when deciding whether to approve them - opening the door to more coal mines in Australia. https://lnkd.in/eGReBngi

Environmentalists’ Climate Change Case Goes Up In Smoke What Happened? Australia’s environmental protection framework has failed to protect the Australian environment from climate change. Environmental advocacy group, the Environmental Council of Central Queensland (ECoCeQ) were contesting requests put before the federal Minister for the Environment and Water (Environment Minister) to allow coal mines Narrabri and Mt Pleasant to continue operating close to 2050. The present case Environment Council of Central Queensland Inc v Minister for the Environment and Water [2024] FCAFC 56 is the third instalment of the ‘Living Wonders’ case. In this case, ECoCeQ sought judicial review (court’s examination of whether government officials made a legally correct decision) of a decision made by the Office of the Environment Minister. The Environment Minister’s office determined that extending the operational life of the aforementioned coal mines and the associated greenhouse gas emissions these mines would produce, would not adversely harm the environment. ECoCeQ strongly disputed this contention. It argued that the Australian environment had already suffered the impacts of climate change and extending these mines’ operational life would only exacerbate the adverse effects that climate change will have on the Australian environment. ECoCeQ raised five grounds for judicial review in this appeal. Arguably the most significant ground of appeal was ground two. ECoCeQ submitted that the Environment Minister failed to consider how extending each mine’s operational life would contribute to climate change. Crucially, all three justices rejected this ground of appeal and ultimately the appeal was dismissed. Ground two was rejected as the court found the Environment Minister did consider that extending the life of the mines would contribute to higher greenhouse gas emissions and, in turn, contribute to climate change. However, the Environment Minister determined these mines’ continued operation would not be a “substantial cause” of ongoing climate change that would harm the Australian environment. Why Is This Significant? Assertions promulgated by the media that the judgment demonstrates the Environment Minister can plainly ignore the consideration of climate change when granting approvals for fossil fuel activities is false. Rather, the decision demonstrates that Australia’s main environmental protection Act, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act is ill-suited to address the threat climate change poses to the Australian environment. Arguably, legislative reform is needed to prohibit new fossil-fuel energy infrastructure developments if Australia is to effectively combat climate change. Disclaimer This post’s content is informational only and is not intended in any way to constitute advice. Image courtesy of Unsplash #law #legalindustry #climatechange

I am thrilled to share that my first article, 'Climate Change Litigation and Environmental Protection', has been published on Medium. #CRAF #ClimateChange #EnvironmentalProtection #ClimateChangeLitigation Read “Climate Change Litigation and Environmental Protection“ by Ihtisham Ul Haq on Medium: https://lnkd.in/e4Zk4Kz9