The Court held that the power to grant interim injunctions under s 310 of the Environment Protection Act 2017 (Vic) is informed by the same statutory modifications as final orders under s 309, including that no proof of harm to persons or the environment is required and no undertaking as to damages can be imposed on the EPA. The environmental protection principles in Part 2.3 of the Act (precautionary principle, primacy of prevention, proportionality, etc.) are relevant to the exercise of discretion and diminish the weight of private financial or reputational concerns and delay arguments in the balance of convenience. On the facts, the Court found a prima facie case was established but was not overwhelming, and declined to grant the full injunctive relief sought (including cessation of asbestos-contaminated soil receipt), instead making more limited reporting and document production orders broadly consistent with the defendants' own prior offer, reflecting a proportionate exercise of the broad statutory discretion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.