-->
Sharechat Logo

Trans-Tasman Resources considers options after consent quashed

Wednesday 29th August 2018

Text too small?

Trans-Tasman Resources is disappointed the High Court quashed its marine consent for an offshore iron sands project and is considering its options.

The appeals were lodged by seven conservation, fishing and iwi groups after the company was given permission to extract 50 million tonnes of seabed material a year. It would export up to 5 million tonnes of iron sand per year from the ocean floor in the South Taranaki Bight, generating $400 million of export revenue annually. 

The 35-year consent was granted in August on the casting vote of the chair of a decision-making committee appointed by the Environmental Protection Authority and included a series of conditions. 

On Tuesday, the High Court ruled the committee's interpretation of an adaptive management approach was too narrow and inconsistent with the Exclusive Economic Zone Act and sent it back to the DMC for reconsideration.

"TTR is disappointed with the High Court outcome," executive chair Alan Eggers said in an emailed response to questions. "TTR is reviewing our QC’s detailed assessment of the ruling and considering our options before being able to comment further." 

Eggers said just one of eight different grounds of appeal was upheld, "and that was solely in relation to the correct legal meaning of 'adaptive management' or the type of environmental compliance monitoring required to be incorporated in the TTR consents."

In yesterday's judgment, Justice Peter Churchman said the committee's interpretation was inconsistent with the purpose of the act of "protecting the environment from pollution by regulating or prohibiting the discharge of harmful substances." It was also inconsistent with the obligation that where information available is uncertain or inadequate, a marine consent authority must favour caution and environmental protection.

"The error was material and may well have influenced the outcome of the consent application," the judgment said.

The court rejected claims that: the EPA should have rejected the application as incomplete; that the committee had failed to apply the legislation's information principles correctly; that the committee had not properly considered the effects of the proposal on existing interests; that the committee had not taken a sufficiently cautious approach; and that it had failed to observe the principles of natural justice.    

TTR has faced a number of obstacles in its bid to begin mining. Its initial consent bid for the project was turned down in 2014 - largely due to a lack of baseline information on the expected impacts of its proposal. 

(BusinessDesk)

  General Finance Advertising    

Comments from our readers

No comments yet

Add your comment:
Your name:
Your email:
Not displayed to the public
Comment:
Comments to Sharechat go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved. It is allowable to use some form of non-de-plume for your name, however we recommend real email addresses are used. Comments from free email addresses such as Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc may not be approved.

Related News:

MARKET CLOSE: NZ shares gain; a2 jumps to 12-month high as earnings outperform
NZ dollar drifts lower following early boost from rising dairy prices
Meridian positions for next generation development
Kiwibank lifts first-half net profit 47.6% amid rekindled growth
John Fellet: Came to Sky TV for 18 months, stayed 28 years
Marsden Maritime net profit down on lower cargo through Northport
Countdown supermarkets 1H earnings dip as digital investment continues
Fletcher open to re-entering high rise construction market
Power price spike put margin squeeze on NZ producers in Dec quarter, stats show
Tilt Renewables to raise A$260m of new equity

IRG See IRG research reports