INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTION — application for urgent interim relief to restrain the aerial shooting, ground shooting, trapping or killing of wild horses in Kosciuszko National Park in furtherance of the Kosciuszko Wild Horse Heritage Management Plan 2021 — whether serious question to be tried — effect of ss 45, 81 and 171 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 — whether persons involved in the operations have requisite authorisation — Carltona principle — balance of convenience favours the Secretary — interim relief refused
Quick Take
1Where a respondent demonstrates that all personnel conducting wild horse control operations in a national park hold specific authorisations under s 171 of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 (NSW) — whether by general or individual instrument — an applicant's inability to independently identify those authorisations does not raise a serious question to be tried as to the lawfulness of the operations.
2On an application for interlocutory relief to restrain culling operations in a national park, the irreversibility of harm to feral animals does not create a presumptive 'fundamental asymmetry' favouring injunctive relief; the court must weigh that harm against the ongoing irreversible environmental damage to native habitat, threatened species and Aboriginal cultural heritage caused by the continued presence of feral animals, as well as the significant public interest in implementing a management plan adopted after extensive public consultation.
3Unexplained delay in commencing proceedings to challenge long-running operations carried out under a publicly adopted management plan is a factor weighing against the grant of interlocutory relief.
