Under s 269(4)(j) of the Mineral Resources Act 1989 (Qld), the Land Court's jurisdiction is confined to considering the environmental impact of operations carried on under the authority of the proposed mining lease, and does not extend to scope 3 emissions from the transportation and burning of coal after extraction. The word 'mine' in s 6A(1) comprehends only physical activities, not the sale or disposition of title to minerals. Whether s 223 of the Environmental Protection Act requires consideration of scope 3 emissions remains contested — the majority held it does not, but Margaret McMurdo P expressed the view that it does. In either case, a factual finding that global emissions would not increase is not amenable to statutory review. The statutory direction to 'consider' specified matters leaves the weight to be given to each matter to the Land Court's judgment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.