In Class 4 judicial review proceedings challenging environmental assessments under s 5.5(1) of the EPA Act on a failure to inquire basis, expert evidence identifying what additional inquiries should have been made is not necessarily a critique of the merits of the decision-maker's assessment and may be admissible. The characterisation of such evidence requires careful attention to the distinction between identifying omitted inquiries and critiquing the substantive conclusions of the decision-maker's experts.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.